From: Dave (dfisher_at_pophost.com)
Date: 2002-02-26 16:15:36
On Sat, 23 Feb 2002 22:34:44 +1000, John Morrison wrote:
>> One quickie, though--please reconsider the use of Java.
>Why not use Java? {No one has given me a good reason to NOT use it) :-)
I remembered Doug Sutherland discussing this, but after looking at his prior
posts, my sense is that he leans in the direction not to use Java, but wanted
to do more testing before giving a final assessment. I am not going to be able
to speak to this, because...
>I am completely open to ideas for the project.
>My personal C++ skills are rusty
... while your C++ skills are rusty, my Java skills are nonexistent. :) My
background is in C, then in C++, and while I thought about moving into Java,
did not have any pressing need to do so.
>So I thought that if there was a chance of completing this project I'd have
>to leave it in an area where I didn't' have to rely on others to do all the
>work. If I have a group of people that were willing to implement/discuss
>the design I'd be quite willing to use what ever they chose!
I understand that, and I would be at a crossroads myself if the group decided
to use Java as the primary language for the project. It may very well be that
Java offers the performance necessary for this project and might even make more
sense given platform independence. But if your C++ skills are not *too* rusty,
I would advocate that course. Would you be willing to work on implementation
if it is in C++? If you are working in Java, I gather that you have a wealth
of expertise in object oriented methods which would be invaluable.
>> From previous threads, C++ seemed to be the prevailing choice.
>Yes there are a lot of C++ programmers on here but are any of you willing to
>implement the design I've out lined?
Well, I think that would depend on the nature of the application that this
group needs most, and that is still very unclear here. So far I get the sense
that OpenEEG has attracted several NF/biofeedback enthusiasts (such as myself),
but that we all have different interests and intentions. What this means is
that whatever we develop will at best be a playground for prototyping. We'll
learn a lot, we'll make a lot of changes to the source code, reconsider our
design and approach, but what we end up with may not be what we need (in order
to promote cheap EEG devices). Or, it might just define that focus. I don't
know, because the audience for OpenEEG seems to waver between the enthusiasts
and the professional biofeedback practitioners (which do not have an adequate
presence here yet).
I, however, would love to work on this project with others. I have already
been fooling around with data acquisition classes under Linux, and have the
framework put together for a client/server based interface. If I come here to
work, my sense is that I will have to abandon this approach, because it relies
on Linux's rich IPC environment. However, I don't do Windows. Nope, just
won't. :) But in order to benefit this group, I think a Windows version will
be necessary because the people who are most apt to use this in professional
circles will all have MS Windows on their machines, so I will work toward
cross-platform independence.
So I need to know that I will be able to (1) actively work and help maintain
code, (2) provide a framework and/or biofeedback library I can use for PIES,
and (3) run it under Linux to reap the many rewards and benefits there. With
that in place, you have me, heart and soul. :-) I'll need more detail on how
you envision the plug-in approach you advocate working (what is the nature of
the hooks that will define the plug-in, how is information passed between
plug-in and engine, plug-in to plug-in?, etc.), but otherwise I think it is a
very workable design. It's going to be complicated in order to support
multiple devices, but I think the reward will be worth the effort.
So... with that in mind, I like the idea of starting with a simple monitor.
Put together the framework, but focus on one very simple implementation of that
framework -- say, a simple line graph display of EEG data, or if you want to
add filters, a mind-mirror like display. This will flex the muscles of all the
various stages that have been talked about here (data acquisition, processing,
and display) and see how well the framework holds up, or if we need to go back
to the drawing board.
Dave.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:38 BST