Open pavel-kirienko opened 2 years ago
I'm not a huge fan. This seems like syntactic sugar that the integrator should provide themselves.
The reason I want these types in the standard set is that they are generic and thus useful for building simple vendor-agnostic interfaces. An integrator could surely provide equivalent definitions but it would result in a slightly less composable solution.
I found it to be often useful to have small fixed-size arrays for representation of arbitrary arrays and matrices without the array prefix:
uavcan.primitive.array.Real16x2
...Real16x9
uavcan.primitive.array.Real32x2
...Real32x9
uavcan.primitive.array.Real64x2
...Real64x9
That would be 24 new types in total.
@thirtytwobits should we add this to the core set?