CLI generator for write conversion

[jmthomas]

What is the use case or problem this feature would solve?

Currently the CLI generator creates a read conversion. All the internal documentation is for read.

Describe the solution you'd like

Option to create a write_conversion with generated code focused on commands and writing. I'd like to see 2 new options: read_conversion and write_conversion and keep plain conversion as an alias to read_conversion (which is the most common).

Additional context

No response

Screenshots

No response

[crawlchat]

Thanks for the detailed feature request! Let me summarize what I found in the codebase to give you a clear picture of the current state and what this would require.

Current State of the CLI Conversion Generator

The generate_conversion method lives in openc3/lib/openc3/utilities/cli_generator.rb (L516), and it currently:

1. Only generates a read-focused template (from openc3/templates/conversion/conversion.{rb,py})
2. Always outputs usage hint pointing to READ_CONVERSION
3. The template itself contains packet.read(...) examples only

The template files are:

• openc3/templates/conversion/conversion.py
• openc3/templates/conversion/conversion.rb

---

What would need to change to implement this:

1. New templates — Add write_conversion.py / write_conversion.rb under openc3/templates/conversion/ with cmd() / packet.write(...) focused comments and examples.

2. CLI generator update — In cli_generator.rb:

   • Add read_conversion and write_conversion to the GENERATORS list (currently conversion is the only one).
   • Add generate_read_conversion (alias to current generate_conversion) and generate_write_conversion (points to the new write template, outputs WRITE_CONVERSION hint).
   • Keep conversion as an alias to read_conversion for backward compatibility.

3. Docs update — The Generators docs would need to reflect the two new options.

This seems like a well-scoped and very reasonable enhancement. Could you share any additional context on what the write conversion template should look like in terms of comments/examples? For instance, should it focus on cmd() usage, packet.write(), or both? That would help the engineers implement the right scaffolding. 🙂