I struggled with that question, but in the end it came to
what’s the difference between creating an implementation of
ILaunchTarget versus IRemoteConnection?
The implementation for Arduino will tell me how much work is
involved. Other than storing the serial port name, it should be
a pretty minimal implementation for IRemoteConnection. So we’ll
see.
The key is to start driving towards a single API for target
management so all our tools can work together. Introducing yet
another one is a maintenance nightmare and really unnecessary.
Doug.
On 28/11/2014 9:46 AM, Doug
Schaefer wrote:
So, I’m currently prototyping replacing
ILaunchTarget with IRemoteConnection. So far, I’m
getting excited about the direction. Everything I wanted
is already in the Remote plug-ins. And it looks easy to
extend to add new connection types. The big test will be
getting the Arduino serial connection implemented with
this. I’ll also be adding a re-usable file system
browser that’ll use the file APIs. The big benefit will
be to get SSH remote target support with minimal effort.
Doug,
I may be wrong but wouldn't it be better to keep
ILaunchTarget very simple and provide an implementation
based on IRemoteConnection. This with a proper
registration mechanism would allow other implementations
of ILaunchTarget that are not based on o.e.remote.
Mikhail