Re: Serial port Connection

Hi all, and thank you Niclas for your very detailed post. Indeed I think you made me realize something I didn't realize till now: You can connect multiple devices to a serial Interface. For me, from the first zero-modem-cable I welded to play command and conquer against a friend, serial interfa

Re: Serial port Connection

Hi Niclas, You are right on all points. I have not tested the Modbus serial driver, but I am very interested that it works on Multidrop connections. Version 0.7.0 is based on Mspec, so a proposal could be: 1. Modify the PLCField to include the UID of the device within the frame from the address

Re: Serial port Connection

Ok, let's dissect this... 1. There are many devices connected to a serial ModBus port. 2. ModBus (and every other serial protocol I have dealt with) are not "connection" oriented, but packets, most of the time very small. The "connection" metaphor in PLC4X for non-TCP comms is actually quite poor

Re: [VOTE] Rename our "master" branch to "release"

1+ El lun., 29 jun. 2020 a las 3:09, Christofer Dutz (< christofer.d...@c-ware.de>) escribió: > Hi all, > > we had already discussed that some days ago, but I’d like to formally have > you all vote on this … just to make it official. > > I always thought “master”, “trunk” etc. were sub-ideal nam

Re: [VOTE] Rename our "master" branch to "release"

+1 a much better description of that branch

Re: Serial port Connection

Hi all, sorry for joining in the party late ... but hopefully not too late. Regarding making the serial port part of the connection string ... I have to admit that right now I couldn't imagine how to not have it in there and not over-complicate things for the users. Yes, if you create a connect

Re: [VOTE] Rename our "master" branch to "release"

+1 Lukas Am Mo., 29. Juni 2020 um 09:10 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz < christofer.d...@c-ware.de>: > +1 (binding) > > Chris > > > Am 29.06.20, 09:09 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" : > > Hi all, > > we had already discussed that some days ago, but I’d like to formally > have you all vote on th

Re: [VOTE] Rename our "master" branch to "release"

+1 (binding) Chris Am 29.06.20, 09:09 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" : Hi all, we had already discussed that some days ago, but I’d like to formally have you all vote on this … just to make it official. I always thought “master”, “trunk” etc. were sub-ideal names as they don’t expla

Re: [VOTE] Rename our "master" branch to "release"

+1 Julian Am 29.06.20, 09:09 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" : Hi all, we had already discussed that some days ago, but I’d like to formally have you all vote on this … just to make it official. I always thought “master”, “trunk” etc. were sub-ideal names as they don’t explain what th

[VOTE] Rename our "master" branch to "release"

Hi all, we had already discussed that some days ago, but I’d like to formally have you all vote on this … just to make it official. I always thought “master”, “trunk” etc. were sub-ideal names as they don’t explain what they are used for. We currently develop on “develop” and therefore I propo

Update on the PLC4C initiative

Hi all, As I was able to finally finish the initial code-generation for PLC4C last week, starting this week I’ll be concentrating on the things we considered SPI in the PLC4J module. I guess the first things will be the ReadBuffer and WriteBuffer and then I’ll have to come up with some base-cla

Personal update ...

Hi folks, the last few weeks showed a little less activity here, especially from me. Now’s the time to give you an update on what and why. Last Friday I officially had my last working day at codecentric. The problem is, that the progress of the project and the adoption of PLC4X in the industry