Homepage GitHub

Uavcan file extension


(Scott Dixon) #1

I’m working through the chapter on dsdl in the v1 specification and realized that I don’t know why dsdl files have a .uavcan extension instead of a .dsdl extension? Should we support either?


Library-independent code generation
(Pavel Kirienko) #2

We might, although it may cause confusion with document schema definition language(s). Should we vote?


(Pavel Kirienko) #4

We need a third option: “I don’t know”. Since I don’t know, I will desist from voting and observe from a distance.


(Scott Dixon) #5

Should we allow .dsdl as a file extension for DSDL files?

  • Yes
  • No
  • I Don’t Know

0 voters

This would be in addition to allowing .uavcan as an extension. If this proposal is accepted we would support two and only two extensions: ( .uavcan , .dsdl ). These extensions, per the v1 specification, would be case-sensitive ergo we would not support (.UAVCAN, .DSDL).


(Pavel Kirienko) #6

This has slipped through the cracks somehow. Do we still want this? If yes, somebody should submit a pull request to PyDSDL.


(Scott Dixon) #7

I took a quick peek but I don’t think anything in there enforces any file extension. Am I missing something?


(Pavel Kirienko) #8

Enforced right here: