Hi Nathan,
My guess is that the problem is a bit more tricky.
The XML block definition works fine as long as the message port is not
present. I can use nports as shown in stream_to_streams.
It also works fine as long as the nports statement is not used and a
message port is defined. This means copy and paste the stream port
definition for every port. Assign a port name manually etc.
Nevertheless the combination using nports and message ports in one XML
definition fails. I hope that clarifies my problem description.
Johannes
On 12.10.2013 13:43, West, Nathan wrote:
Re: #1, if the block's xml is malformed then GRC will basically show
nothing (that grey flowgraph page you describe). Are you defining $ports
in the make node? Compare to a similar block to make sure everything is
defined properly.
https://github.com/gnuradio/gnuradio/blob/master/gr-blocks/grc/blocks_streams_to_stream.xml
I'm not sure of a way to debug what section might be wrong, so compare
against other blocks with message ports too.
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Jared Clements
<address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
I'll confirm that #2 is either a bug or merely unexpected behavior.
I work around it by prototyping hier blocks as custom GRC blocks,
then using that to build an OOT module block that actually works.
Being unable to enter parameters at run time is severely limiting.
I've not experienced #1, that functionality seems to work once I get
the python file and the GRC file matching. I was getting the same
errors for a while until I found the right idiom.
Jared
On Oct 12, 2013 11:18 AM, "Johannes Demel" <address@hidden
<mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
Hi list,
I discovered 2 problems with GRC recently.
1. I have a custom block with a message port (with a fixed port
name)
and some stream ports which include a <nports>...</nports>
definition.
The whole thing works fine as long as I have a fixed number of
ports.
Each declared separately. But as soon as I use a nport statement GRC
won't display this block correctly [1]. Even worse if I enter values
which affect the number of ports, the whole flowgraph will
disappear.
Just a grey flowgraph page.
2. To make things easier for me (and to not create a well known
kind of
artwork) I use hier blocks. This works fine as long as I have
fixed size
vector ports. But adding a parameter block, say vlen, for vector
size to
dynamically change the hier block doesn't work. The python generator
does not generate the hier block python file with vlen as vector
size.
Instead it puts in the default value. A parameter block without
default
value results in an error. A hard coded vector size is not exactly
helpful in this case.
I didn't have time to dig into it yet. Thus I thought I share my
experience with you. Maybe I am not the only one with this
problem and
someone already knows how to fix it.
Happy hacking
Johannes
[1]
<sink>
<name>msg</name>
<type>message</type>
<optional>1</optional>
</sink>
<sink>
<name>in</name>
<type>complex</type>
<vlen>$vlen</vlen>
<nports>$ports</nports>
</sink>
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio