Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Port names confusing #11

Open
lenhart opened this issue Feb 27, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Port names confusing #11

lenhart opened this issue Feb 27, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@lenhart
Copy link
Contributor

lenhart commented Feb 27, 2021

Hey,

I find the port names a bit confusing. We have Montior_PVT port and GNSS_Synchro port in the settings menu, but Monitor and PVT streams from GNSS-SDR.
This is a bit unintuitive at first glance. Can I rename them to the GNSS-SDR equivalents, or are there reasons which I have not yet seen why the names are how they are?

Thanks again for the good work!
Cheers

@acebrianjuan
Copy link
Owner

Hi @lenhart,

I find the port names a bit confusing. We have Montior_PVT port and GNSS_Synchro port in the settings menu, but Monitor and PVT streams from GNSS-SDR.

I agree. This is something I have thought about too :)

This is a bit unintuitive at first glance. Can I rename them to the GNSS-SDR equivalents, or are there reasons which I have not yet seen why the names are how they are?

In essence, I decided to label the ports based on the serialization object that each port expects to receive from GNSS-SDR. The Monitor block streams Gnss_Synchro objects and the PVT block streams Monitor_Pvt objects, hence the names you see in the Preferences window. I probably had a good reason for doing it like this back then but, certainly, naming ports based on low-level implementation details is far from ideal and can lead to confusion as you say.

The fact of the matter is that GNSS-SDR has evolved since then: A few months ago, we got a very nice pull request (gnss-sdr/gnss-sdr#437) which added monitoring streams to the Acquisition and Tracking blocks[1] and, just a few days ago, the PVT block was added the capability of streaming GPS and Galileo ephemeris data (see gnss-sdr/gnss-sdr@1721431).

In the (hopefully) not-too-distant future I wish to update the GUI and use all these new streams. This will require adding 3 new UDP ports among other internal changes. So this new scenario will demand rethinking the port names as you have pointed out. I envision to use the following port names:

  • Acquisition port (new)
  • Tracking port (new)
  • Observables port (former GNSS_Synchro port)
  • PVT port (former Monitor_Pvt port)
  • Ephemeris port (new)

I would like to know your thoughts about this.
Thank you.

Álvaro


[1]: More info about how it works here: https://sourceforge.net/p/gnss-sdr/mailman/message/37149141/

@lenhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

lenhart commented Feb 28, 2021

Hi @acebrianjuan,

thank you so much for the additional resources and clarifications. Now I see the reason for the naming of the ports. Didn't have the underlying class names in mind.

Removing the monitor from the Monitor_Pvt port alone will help to reduce the confusion how to connect the two sides:

GNSS-SDR GUI
Monitor stream GNSS_Synchro port
PVT stream Monitor_Pvt port

because they no longer seem to both fit to the Monitor_Pvt port.

Otherwise the naming seems very good to me. Only the Observables port still could be confusing, because in the current GNSS-SDR system design, the monitor block is not part of the observables but stand-alone. Don't know if that design will be changed in the future now that various blocks have their streaming capabilities, but maybe name it Observables/Monitor for clarity?

Best ragards
Malte

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants