Namespaces and module suggestions again, OBDII

shotgunefx has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

I'm working on a module for interfacing to my car's (OBDII - Onboard Diagnostic Port) diagnostic port. The device I'm using is an ELM323 based OBDII intepreter. Basically a serial interface to the car, which allows you to send requests to the car and retrieve data. Cars have several interfaces (ISO,VPW,CANBus), mine is targeted for ISO (though I believe the computer side is the same for most other protocols)

Something like "Device::ELM323::ISO" seems ok, but feels like OBDII should be mentioned in there somewhere.

Another thing I'm wondering about before I hit CPAN with this (and another module) is the best practice for handling example scripts.

For example, I'd like to include an example control script with the module distro, but not sure the best way to have influence the makefile. I'd like it included, but not necessarily installed anywhere outside of where the module is unzipped .

Any suggestions would be welcome.
update
Clarified some acronyms.

-Lee

perl digital dash (in progress)

Comment on Namespaces and module suggestions again, OBDII

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Namespaces and module suggestions again, OBDII by kulls (Hermit) on Nov 23, 2005 at 03:57 UTC
hi, I found some of other intepreters here. I suggest that you can categorized to Device::Interpreter and in that category,you can hold all your interpreter families like ELM 322, ELM320 and so on.As you mentioned,`ELM323::OBDII` is reasonable. -kulls	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: Namespaces and module suggestions again, OBDII by shotgunefx (Parson) on Nov 23, 2005 at 05:01 UTC
Apparently the ELM327 is only a few weeks old. Didn't really pick up on it before, but the 320 and 322 are for cars that utilize PWM and VPW respectively. I thought they were previous revisions of the interface. Looking at the data sheets, seems to confirm that the command set and return values are the same for all (Excluding the 327, which uses CAN and has a lot of other options). So this should work in theory for all of the popular varients. So maybe OBDII::ELM32X instead? Though it seems like Device should be in there somewhere from a taxonomy point of view. Plus It needs a Device::SerialPort or Win32::SerialPort or subclass passed to it's constructor. What do you think of "Device::OBDII::ELM32X" -Lee perl digital dash (in progress)	[reply]

Back to Seekers of Perl Wisdom


No such thing as a small change
	PerlMonks