|
From: | Eduardo lavratti |
Subject: | Re: [Paparazzi-devel] paparazzi user edition? |
Date: | Wed, 23 May 2012 14:39:40 +0000 |
Paparazzi is almost perfect to me.
The major problem is: 1- lack of documentation about modules (EX: photogrametry, cam etc..) 2- the way waypoints work in GCS. all other autopilot have full dinamic waypoint creation. PPZ use hardcoded waypoint creation so the way it would be made easy is a way to load an archive with waypoint positionĀ“s. When this archieve is load the HARDCODED waypoint are re-alocated. In this way i can use a pre-formated flightplan with 200waypoint and the waypoint loaded file re-arrange all waypoints. I an not a good programer but i will work in this solution with a friend that is a good C programmer. Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 16:06:04 +0200 From: address@hidden To: address@hidden Subject: Re: [Paparazzi-devel] paparazzi user edition? Even for developers it's not easy to know what to edit in xml. I personally very often find myself doing: ls ./conf/autopilot/*.makefile in order to know the current names of subsytems and cat ./sw/airborne/modules/digital_cam/*.h | grep -n2 define to know the name of the define and cat ./conf/modules/d*.xml or cat ./conf/boards/lisa-m*.makefile to know which parameters can be configured.
This is the kind of stuff that could easily go into a (autogenerated) editor. Question I have is: which programming language to write this into. OCAML would be an obvious choice, with its built-in xml + loads of libs and would probably only be a few pages of code. But suppose we for once would not use OCAML, then what would be a better choice?
-Christophe On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Chris Gough <address@hidden> wrote: Editing XML is not pretty, but it's not difficult either; the _______________________________________________ Paparazzi-devel mailing list address@hidden https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/paparazzi-devel |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |