🚀 go-pugleaf

I was interested in implementing this idea for use on our EAVE AUV's,
but the problem seems to be that many architectures (ours included) are
heirarchical and the "robotic language" only is useful at one strata of
the heirarchy, mainly for controlling the real-time low level areas of
the vehicle.  Since the management here at the lab thinks that the
robotics aspects of our vehicle are old news, they are only interested
in research related to "high level" things, like planning, data fusion
for analysis, etc. (Mainly because its trendy and they know it can get
funded.. Does this attitude exist everywhere, or are we the only ones 
coping with this.. This looks like a good topic for another article, so
I'll continue discussion there.)

What I'm trying to say is that its a great idea, and that there is
interest in it in industry, but that it doesn't sell well 'cause its not
big and flashy with neat graphics.  If you can get the money to research
it, go for it. 

-Roger
(stay tuned for posting #2 on attitudes of management)
-- 
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting
 than the question of whether a submarine can swim" - Edsgar W. Dijkstra 
rg@unhd.unh.edu               |  UNH Marine Systems Engineering Laboratory
r_gonzalez@unhh.bitnet        |  Durham, NH  03824-3525