[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Paparazzi-devel] UBX vs NMEA Protocol Inquiry

From: Chris Gough
Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] UBX vs NMEA Protocol Inquiry
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:50:18 +1100

On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Jake Stewart <address@hidden> wrote:
> I don't think there's any real technical challenge, just a lack of 
> programming effort.
>  Despite the potential advantage of a binary protocol, MNEA is about as 
> simple as
> it gets and you can crank the speed up pretty much as high as you'd ever want.

There are many MNEA dialects, the programming effort required to work
well with all of them is huge.

>  Paparazzi uses a fast but esoteric GPS protocol (uBlox, <1% market share)

ublox is "one of the big three" GPS producers, I think your figure is
probably out by at least an order of magnitude.

> I do have to get a NMEA GPS working since I don't have the luxury of using an 
> oddball, esoteric GPS protocol.

They are all oddball and esoteric. Which NMEA dialect are you forced into using?

Chris Gough

>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Chris Wozny
>> Sent: 03/01/12 09:42 AM
>> To: paparazzi-devel
>> Subject: [Paparazzi-devel] UBX vs NMEA Protocol Inquiry
>> All,
>> I was wondering if someone had a technical explanation as to why the
>> UBX protocol is faster than NMEA parsing. I know in the past people
>> have said NMEA sucks and binary protocol's are faster, but I just want
>> to make sure I understand the technical reason. I know parsing ASCII
>> strings requires more CPU cycles, but don't you still have to parse
>> the UBX output as well?
>> Best,
>> Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
>> address@hidden
> _______________________________________________
> Paparazzi-devel mailing list
> address@hidden


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]