Ben Dooks wrote:To a certain extent I agree, it's a pretty hideous name and I'm happy to change it if someone can come up with a better one whilst maintaining the flexibility to handle devices that do a range of different sensing and output tasks. On this, see the original discussion (where using that was one of the options) discussed. Basically it comes down to a different set of requirements with the ability to handle events from the device, ring buffering and higher (non cached) update rates. Whilst we could have bludgeoned the functionality into that framework, it was decided that it was better to start afresh. Thanks, -- Jonathan Cameron --
