Hey andreas, chris,

I recognized that Andreas added a patcht o fix the PLC4X-56 bug and I digged 
into PLC4X-57 and fixed that.
I will try to provide a PR today or tomorrow for both fixes (based on Andreas 
patch).

Best
Julian

PS.: I'm unsure about the antlr parser if we have a working parser I think 
that’s unnecessary as there are more important things to work on.

Am 26.09.18, 15:16 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <[email protected]>:

    And I just had a short look just before the first Keynote at ApacheCon.
    
    Regarding: PLC4X-59 [S7] Reading a UDINT with value 0x00000000 and non 
positive floating point values does not work
    The different types in S7 definitely have to be fine-tuned. I checked the 
UDINT constants in org.apache.plc4x.java.s7.netty.model.types.TransportSize and 
I noticed that the constants for UDINT and DINT are the same (Which can't be 
correct) same with SINT and USINT and INT and UINT ... so we will probably need 
to find out how to distinguish these types. So if anyone has some way to 
reliably read these values, it would be super helpful to do so and record the 
communication with WireShark and attach these recordings to the Jira issue. I 
just didn't have the means to produce such traffic without looking in the 
sourcecode of WireShart (Which would be an absolute No-Go as it's GPL licensed)
    
    PLC4X-56 [S7] S7Field does not recognize addresses with numElements present
    PLC4X-57 [S7] Response for address with numElements contains only first item
    Will definitely be fixed by Julians proposed ANTLR parser.
    
    PLC4X-58 [S7] Reading more then PDU with one request blocks calling thread 
indefinitly 
    This is exactly what I have been using and testing so I'm a little 
surprised. Could you please do a WireShark recording and attach that to the 
issue?
    
    Chris
    
    Am 26.09.18, 08:16 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <[email protected]>:
    
        Hey,
        
        I had the exact same discussion with Sebastian on slack (he also 
suggested 0.2.0).
        Because he fixed Modbus and we want to have it releases : )
        So I don’t care about the number that much as long as we do it 
regularly and prepare a 0.2.0 as a "(bug-)fixed" 0.1.0.
        
        Its good that we're all on the same side here.
        
        Julian
        
        Am 26.09.18, 14:12 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" 
<[email protected]>:
        
            By the way ... Just noticed that I replied to the vote thread ... 
Should have been here. So please take the discussion here.
            
            Chris
            
            Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen
            
            ________________________________
            From: Stefan Bodewig <[email protected]>
            Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:50:13 PM
            To: [email protected]
            Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
            
            On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
            
            > Hi,
            
            >> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the 
RC as it
            >>  matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but 
includes an
            >>  extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little 
strange, is
            >>  this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
            
            > As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
            > vote email.
            
            True.
            
            Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
            should be named like this.
            
            Stefan
            
        
        
    
    

Reply via email to