Hi all
I’m playing a bit with my UI thingy and am currently implementing some Tag
editor.
I have inputs for the address string, the type name as well as the array-info
and I need to generate the full address string for all drivers from these
fragments.
Currently it seems not all drivers follow the same structure.
I did a survey on LinkedIn on the various aspects of how array-notations could
be processed.
Even if the survey is not over yet, it does look as if the following seems to
align with most people:
[2..5] implicates elements 2,3,4,5
[2..5, 6..9] is a multi-dimensional array
Ideally, we should probably also understand things like, but when serializing
we should use above notations:
[5] is a shorthand for elements 0, 1, 2, 3, 4
[4][6] (A more IT-like array definition)
Now for integrating things in other tools, I think it would be good if all
address strings had the following structure (similar to how our connection
strings work)
{protocol-dependent-address}:{typename}{[array-syntax]}{options}
The type-name could be omitted for protocols such as ADS where the address
already defines the type.
In that case we should probably also have API types for accessing these parts
of the addresses.
What do you think?
Chris
And for STRING and WSTRING to also have optional string-lengths in round
brackets behind the STRING or WSTRING.
What do you think?
Chris
