You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I think it may be time to adopt a similar strategy for our ASI stages as we have done with our Hamamatsu cameras. Currently, there is a fair amount of code duplication.
I would propose that we consolidate all of the stage_asi_... classes into a single file, stage_asi. We should create a ASIStage(StageBase) class that provides the vast majority of the functionality. Then, TigerController(ASIStage), MS2000(ASIStage), and MFC2000(ASIStage) classes that implement the minor differences between their command protocols.
Some similar strategy should also be done with the APIs.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think it may be time to adopt a similar strategy for our ASI stages as we have done with our Hamamatsu cameras. Currently, there is a fair amount of code duplication.
I would propose that we consolidate all of the stage_asi_... classes into a single file,
stage_asi
. We should create aASIStage(StageBase)
class that provides the vast majority of the functionality. Then,TigerController(ASIStage)
,MS2000(ASIStage)
, andMFC2000(ASIStage)
classes that implement the minor differences between their command protocols.Some similar strategy should also be done with the APIs.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: