Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Why Isn't GNU Radio Used More?

[Colby Boyer]

On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Michael Dickens <address@hidden> wrote:
> On May 9, 2011, at 4:42 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
>> Gnu Radio, to me, is a DSP engine that happens to live on a general-purpose 
>> compute platform.
>
> True.  But the GNU Radio model is build on data-flow, while the Octave model 
> is not -- and, that might be a key difference.  People have grown, for better 
> or worse, used to using the MATLAB / Octave script processing model -- which 
> is buffer based instead of block based.  I don't see a need to change GNU 
> Radio's model -- but rather to note that it is different from MATLAB / Octave 
> & thus new(er) users need to think differently about how to write GNU Radio 
> scripts.  I doubt this difference in models makes any difference in adoption, 
> but maybe it does? - MLD
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>

I think it is important to point out, is that *most* baseband
processor design seems to follow a buffer-esque* based model for
implementation in silicon. A lot of wireless standards switch
modulation and coding midway through frames. Look at 802.11, GPP
Release XX, etc as examples. You need a sample buffer to jump to and
from in, to correctly decode a frame/packet/burst/etc. I don't always
find this easy with the GNURadio framework, or maybe I am doing it
wrong.

*I say buffer-esque because once the buffers have been carved out, a
specific will go down a specific demodulation chain, i.e. CCK
modulation or DQPSK.