On Dec 2, 2007, at 5:11 PM, Richard Graham wrote:
> One question there is a mention a new pml that is essentially CM
> Why is this no just another instance of CM ?
I'm not sure I understand your question -- the new proposed PML would
be different than CM: it would have matching and support more than one
underlying device (e.g., more than one MTL).
Could this just be CM with some run-time parameter enabled?
Possibly. Is it worth it? I'm not sure -- CM is nice in that it's so
small / simple. Do we really want to make it more complex?
All of this is speculation / vaporware at the moment anyway -- just
tossing around some ideas...