I’ve spent quite some time looking at the alternatives, with the result that no matter how much I hate the specification, how horrible I think the format is, how terribly designed is the syntax, DBC is the standard that everyone seems to want to follow.

For our holy grain of DBC signals -> OVMS metrics, we can use ‘attributes’ to define OVMS specific stuff (like signal name to OVMS metric names).

So, I’ve created a DBC component, and put in the basic structures to define the objects in a DBC file. I’ve also started the work to parse DBC files and load them in. The basic idea is:


The overall goal is:


The biggest amount of work is the DBC file handling itself. The changes to the vehicle base class are pretty simple.

Regards, Mark.

On 19 Apr 2018, at 11:06 AM, Mark Webb-Johnson <mark@webb-johnson.net> wrote:

The whole decoding/encoding thing (where we use DBC or whatever to say key X byte Y is converted to v.bat.soc using this formula) is of course the holy grain of this; and is built upon all the foundation I’m laying now. The end goal remains for vehicle modules with just a DBC (or whatever) and no actual code.