Re: AW: Changes on mspec: parameterized type refs, assert, try, const

An alternative might be to have one static function per field type and used simple type and one for each field type for complex types and not using lambdas. Holen Sie sich Outlook für Android From: Christofer Dutz Sent: Friday, October 8,

Re: AW: Changes on mspec: parameterized type refs, assert, try, const

Good point... As I said, I'll create a new template and then we can experiment with it. Chris Holen Sie sich Outlook für Android From: Łukasz Dywicki Sent: Thursday, October 7, 2021 11:23:55 PM To: dev@plc4x.apache.org Subject: Re: AW: C

Re: Modbus choosing the correct write function

On 2021-10-07 23:33, Łukasz Dywicki wrote: As far I know Murphy's law we will then find devices which require write multiple even for single register. ;-) I can confirm that I have come across that too, and pretty sure it applies to both reads and writes. One could argue that such devices are

Re: Modbus choosing the correct write function

Hey Soeren, Indeed this might be a gap in current protocol logic. Given that write requests might contain multiple data points/registers we assumed write-multiple as default. Restrictions you mentioned are very common for many devices hence we shall update logic somehow. Currently, as far I kno

Re: AW: Changes on mspec: parameterized type refs, assert, try, const

Hey Chris, Given the code generation is a serious piece of work and code to go with I wanted to highlight just one thing. Lambda expressions might result in messy stack traces. Since frame parsing in some ways is recursive process it migth result in multiple lambdas on stack trace. As long as

AW: Changes on mspec: parameterized type refs, assert, try, const

Hi, now that I'm sort of allmost finished with adjusting the mspec parsers and model types, I'm planning up update the code generation templates. I know that if I do it the normal way, that this would excessivley blow up the complexity and size of the template files as well as that of the produ

AW: plc4x bug question

Definitely seems to make sense from my perspective ... but we would probably have to update all of the overriding types too. Chris -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Christofer Dutz Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2021 15:29 An: dev@plc4x.apache.org; Julian Feinauer (j.feina...@pragmatic

WG: plc4x bug question

I found this in my spam directory ... Any comments on this? @Julian Feinauer ... you're the Netty Guru here? ;-) Chris -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: wq Gesendet: Donnerstag, 7. Oktober 2021 05:54 An: dev-ow...@plc4x.apache.org Betreff: plc4x bug question class NettyChannelFactory /*