whs92
whs92
@tacaswell I read the link you suggested. https://vorpus.org/blog/notes-on-structured-concurrency-or-go-statement-considered-harmful/ From what I gather, your point in suggesting reading this is that we have to be careful. Keeping track of the concurrent...
As @dmgav stated on slac, once you provide all the nescesary features like submission and checking of plans and devices, monitoring of running plans, etc you'll probably end up with...
I'd also love to see this feature!
Could we also stage and unstage at each reading of the baseline so it was independent of the plan?
I think the ability to also easily access archive data is amazing. I think your proposed namespace makes sense.
Your proposal matches what we (and I guess you) are currently doing with adding metadata about what proposal/ purpose/tag this data being made is related to, and then leaving it...
I think this is a pretty cool idea. I'm interested what @coretl thinks and whether it's something that's already offered or planned in ophyd-async