Chapter 3 - DSDL specification #46
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…step is a full rewrite
…ric versions for ease of parsing
…ced with 'data schema' for definition and 'object' for implementation
Co-Authored-By: pavel-kirienko <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: pavel-kirienko <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: pavel-kirienko <[email protected]>
Co-Authored-By: pavel-kirienko <[email protected]>
Proofreading of Chapter 3 - DSDL specification
…/files/fffe93b4a9dc1f3cd08a8687eabcb3caa28b5e95#r277125281 I have somewhat strictened the port-ID assignment rules to avoid possible confusion; if necessary, we can go back to less strict rules in the next minor version of the specification since the backward compatibility would not be compromised. There is some minor duplication of text in chapters 2 and 3; this is probably acceptable because it helps us to reduce the number of forward references.
|
I seem to have either resolved or asked further questions on all of the raised issues except:
I will be back to these around Wed/Thu; meanwhile, feel free to review my other changes. |
…04a143f9ea26042e09#r33408402
Yes. Fixed in 17ef29d |
One-bit integers allow us to eliminate special cases in the serialization definitions for variable arrays and unions.
|
I seem to have resolved all of the outstanding issues. Here is a compiled doc: UAVCAN_Specification.pdf (this PR is becoming very messy and hard to follow) |
pavel-kirienko
changed the title
|
👍 |
@thirtytwobits LGTY? |
|
Yes. LGTM. (sorry) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
At a first glance it seems to be complete content-wise and the structure is probably the best I could muster without rewriting the whole thing from scratch again. I am going to re-read it again tomorrow and fix the remaining inconsistencies (especially inconsistent term usages) and missed details.
The most important task right now is to ensure that the DSDL specification is complete and all relevant aspects of the language are described unambiguously. I would like you to review the chapter and try and answer the following questions:
If you find bad wording, misspelled words, bad grammar, missing articles (sorry), and similar language-level errors, please ignore them for now unless they are also related to any of the above issues.
Don't look at the diff, it's huge and mostly meaningless; instead, use this prebuilt PDF:
UAVCAN_Specification.pdf
After this PR is finished and merged, I am going to introduce a few sweeping changes in the document to fix inconsistent term usage and some formatting issues. The introductory chapter will be expanded with a very brief section on motivation (one or two sentences), and the section listing the document conventions also requires extension (for example, the DSDL chapter uses notation like Container<Element> for higher-order type parametrization, but it is not explicitly introduced anywhere yet). Also, I am hoping to bring the total number of pages under 100 (many a reader would be repelled by the three-digit number of pages) by changing the page geometry somewhat.
@kjetilkjeka @thirtytwobits please review.