Roger Binns
2004-11-13 17:41:42 UTC
I saw Stephen take a first stab at the description syntax for AT
commands (you can see that in p_samsungscha620.p).
Our current scheme is designed for binary data, as well as being
able to put in control flows (eg if statements, number of items
in a list).
I am wondering if any other scheme may work better?
One thing I was thinking of is a format string like
(s)printf takes. We could then write it something
like:
"$command %islot,%uslot,%dunno1,%dunno2,$name,%dunno3,%dunno4,$..."
Actually that seems to suck since it isn't possible to annotate
the fields amongst other things. I guess the big difference is
that whitespace can be ignored with AT style commands/responses.
Any ideas on improvements?
Roger
commands (you can see that in p_samsungscha620.p).
Our current scheme is designed for binary data, as well as being
able to put in control flows (eg if statements, number of items
in a list).
I am wondering if any other scheme may work better?
One thing I was thinking of is a format string like
(s)printf takes. We could then write it something
like:
"$command %islot,%uslot,%dunno1,%dunno2,$name,%dunno3,%dunno4,$..."
Actually that seems to suck since it isn't possible to annotate
the fields amongst other things. I guess the big difference is
that whitespace can be ignored with AT style commands/responses.
Any ideas on improvements?
Roger