[NOTICE][PLC4Net] Plc4Net now outside of the sandbox and with new code-generation

2021-12-15 Thread Christofer Dutz 
Hi all,

today I invested most of the day, to update the plc4net branch to the latest 
changes with the code-generation. Actually so much had changed, that I 
completely replaced it with a new version.

The current state of the code generation is that it generates the model, the 
enums and the DataIo parts. What's still missing is the generation of the 
parsing and serialization code for the complex types, but I hope to be able to 
finish that soon.

I also took the liberty of merging that code back to develop and moving the 
plc4net stuff out of the sandbox. Hopefully it will gain a bit more attraction 
there.

Chris

Re: [LAZY-CONSENSUS] Clean up in our branches?

2021-12-15 Thread Ben Hutcheson 
Hi,

The modbus string branch can be deleted. It has an implementation
of read/writing strings with set lengths for Java, the same way that the S7
driver specifies it.
For PLC4X-304, Lukasz had a comment about it being able to be applied to
the 0.8 branch, but otherwise it seems like it can be removed.

feature/modbusrtu wasn't on the list, but I think we should keep it. It
should be in a working state (Although I don't have anything but a
simulator to test with) but just needs some clean up and documentation.

Kind Regards

Ben

On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 11:30 PM Cesar Garcia 
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> +1
>
> s7event (I think this is
> merged, right?)
>
>
>
> El mié, 15 dic 2021 a las 5:23, Christofer Dutz (<
> christofer.d...@c-ware.de>)
> escribió:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have just tried to revive a not so old branch (feature/plc4net) and
> that
> > is a LOT of work.
> >
> > Considering how many super-old branches we have; I would like to propose
> > to clean up all branches that haven't been touched for at least a year.
> > (I know one or two I stripped from this list, because they were mine and
> I
> > want to update them or they are release branches, which I think we should
> > keep)
> >
> > Right now, we have 48 branches.
> >
> > The ones I would delete are:
> >
> > Stale for longer than 12 months:
> > feature/code-gen-julian<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/code-gen-julian> (3 years)
> > too-many-open-files<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/too-many-open-files> (2 years)
> > fix-netty-usage (2
> > years)
> > fix-bytebuff-leaks<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/fix-bytebuff-leaks>
> > (2 years)
> > feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base<
> >
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base
> >
> > (2 years)
> > feature/optimizer-for-next-gen<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/optimizer-for-next-gen> (2
> > years)
> > develop-test (2
> years)
> > feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol<
> >
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol
> >
> > (2 years)
> > feature/profinet
> > (2 years)
> > feature/plc-simulator<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/plc-simulator> (2 years)
> > feature/bacnet-active<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/bacnet-active> (2 years)
> > bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel<
> >
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel>
> > (16 months)
> > feature/parser-tracing<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/parser-tracing> (16 months)
> > issue/PLC4X-258
> (13
> > months)
> > feature/grpc-proxy<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/grpc-proxy>
> > (13 months)
> > issue/PLC4X-252
> (14
> > months)
> >
> > Newer branches, that I think might be obsolete or forgotten to be deleted
> > ...
> > feature/sparkplug-gateway<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/sparkplug-gateway> (9
> months)
> > fix/modbus_string >
> > (is this obsolete? What's the status on this?)
> > feature/profinet2 >
> > (I think this is merged, right?)
> > feature/updated-mspec-string<
> > https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/updated-mspec-string> (I
> > think this is obsolete, right?)
> > issue/PLC4X-304 (I
> > think this is merged, right?)
> > issue/PLC4X-311 (I
> > think this is merged, right?)
> > s7event (I think this is
> > merged, right?)
> >
> > So, anyone wanting to keep one of these branches ... please reply in
> let's
> > say the next 7 days and if I don't hear back from you, I'll delete the
> > listed branches.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
>
> --
> *CEOS Automatización, C.A.*
> *GALPON SERVICIO INDUSTRIALES Y NAVALES FA, C.A.,*
> *PISO 1, OFICINA 2, AV. RAUL LEONI, SECTOR GUAMACHITO,*
>
> *FRENTE A LA ASOCIACION DE GANADEROS,BARCELONA,EDO. ANZOATEGUI*
> *Ing. César García*
>
> *Cel: +58 414-760.98.95*
>
> *Hotline Técnica SIEMENS: 0800 1005080*
>
> *Email: support.aan.automat...@siemens.com
> *
>

[jira] [Created] (PLC4X-327) with-c doesn't build on macOS

2021-12-15 Thread Otto Fowler (Jira) 
Otto Fowler created PLC4X-327:
-

 Summary: with-c doesn't build on macOS
 Key: PLC4X-327
 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLC4X-327
 Project: Apache PLC4X
  Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Otto Fowler
Assignee: Otto Fowler



{code:c++}
  
#ifdef DEBUG_PLC4C_SYSTEM
#include 
  printf("\n PLC4C Connection \n"
"Connection String:\t%s\n"
"Protocol Code:\t\t%s\n"
"Transport Code:\t\t%s\n"
"Connection Info:\t%s\n"
"Parameters:\t\t%s\n",
new_connection->connection_string ? new_connection->connection_string : 
"NULL",
new_connection->protocol_code ? new_connection->protocol_code : "NULL",
new_connection->transport_code ? new_connection->transport_code : "NULL",
new_connection->transport_connect_information ? 
new_connection->transport_connect_information : "NULL",
new_connection->parameters ? new_connection->parameters : "NULL");
#endif

{code}


This code causes an error because of the inclusion of stdio.h in the middle of 
the unit:

{code}
2 warnings generated.
[  9%] Building C object spi/CMakeFiles/plc4c-spi.dir/src/subscribe.c.o
[ 10%] Building C object spi/CMakeFiles/plc4c-spi.dir/src/system.c.o
In file included from 
/Users/ottofowler/tmp/downloaded-plc4x-0.9.1rc2/0.9.1/rc2/apache-plc4x-0.9.1/plc4c/spi/src/system.c:298:
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Platforms/MacOSX.platform/Developer/SDKs/MacOSX11.1.sdk/usr/include/stdio.h:260:54:
 error: function definition is not allowed here
__header_always_inline int __sputc(int _c, FILE *_p) {
 ^
1 error generated.
make[2]: *** [spi/CMakeFiles/plc4c-spi.dir/src/system.c.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [spi/CMakeFiles/plc4c-spi.dir/all] Error 2
make: *** [all] Error 2
{code}


Section 7.1.2 Standard headers of the C standard says, in part:

If used, a header shall be included outside of any external declaration or 
definition, and it shall first be included before the first reference to any of 
the functions or objects it declares, or to any of the types or macros it 
defines.

So this isn't really right, I certainly don't think it is good practice in C.  

We should hav two ifdef's one in the header section and one where the code is





--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)

Re: [LAZY-CONSENSUS] Clean up in our branches?

2021-12-15 Thread Cesar Garcia 
Hi everyone,

+1

s7event (I think this is
merged, right?)



El mié, 15 dic 2021 a las 5:23, Christofer Dutz ()
escribió:

> Hi all,
>
> I have just tried to revive a not so old branch (feature/plc4net) and that
> is a LOT of work.
>
> Considering how many super-old branches we have; I would like to propose
> to clean up all branches that haven't been touched for at least a year.
> (I know one or two I stripped from this list, because they were mine and I
> want to update them or they are release branches, which I think we should
> keep)
>
> Right now, we have 48 branches.
>
> The ones I would delete are:
>
> Stale for longer than 12 months:
> feature/code-gen-julian<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/code-gen-julian> (3 years)
> too-many-open-files<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/too-many-open-files> (2 years)
> fix-netty-usage (2
> years)
> fix-bytebuff-leaks
> (2 years)
> feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base>
> (2 years)
> feature/optimizer-for-next-gen<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/optimizer-for-next-gen> (2
> years)
> develop-test (2 years)
> feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol>
> (2 years)
> feature/profinet
> (2 years)
> feature/plc-simulator<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/plc-simulator> (2 years)
> feature/bacnet-active<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/bacnet-active> (2 years)
> bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel>
> (16 months)
> feature/parser-tracing<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/parser-tracing> (16 months)
> issue/PLC4X-258 (13
> months)
> feature/grpc-proxy
> (13 months)
> issue/PLC4X-252 (14
> months)
>
> Newer branches, that I think might be obsolete or forgotten to be deleted
> ...
> feature/sparkplug-gateway<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/sparkplug-gateway> (9 months)
> fix/modbus_string
> (is this obsolete? What's the status on this?)
> feature/profinet2
> (I think this is merged, right?)
> feature/updated-mspec-string<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/updated-mspec-string> (I
> think this is obsolete, right?)
> issue/PLC4X-304 (I
> think this is merged, right?)
> issue/PLC4X-311 (I
> think this is merged, right?)
> s7event (I think this is
> merged, right?)
>
> So, anyone wanting to keep one of these branches ... please reply in let's
> say the next 7 days and if I don't hear back from you, I'll delete the
> listed branches.
>
> Chris
>
>

-- 
*CEOS Automatización, C.A.*
*GALPON SERVICIO INDUSTRIALES Y NAVALES FA, C.A.,*
*PISO 1, OFICINA 2, AV. RAUL LEONI, SECTOR GUAMACHITO,*

*FRENTE A LA ASOCIACION DE GANADEROS,BARCELONA,EDO. ANZOATEGUI*
*Ing. César García*

*Cel: +58 414-760.98.95*

*Hotline Técnica SIEMENS: 0800 1005080*

*Email: support.aan.automat...@siemens.com
*

RE: [LAZY-CONSENSUS] Clean up in our branches?

2021-12-15 Thread Christofer Dutz 
Hi Lukasz,

yeah ... I had a look at what you two did with regards to PROFINET and I think 
I have a more complete version of the mspec in develop now. The LLDP stuff 
would be cool to keep, but I think I also have discovery related stuff working 
in develop ... so please double check if it's not already there and perhaps 
expand were I was missing things.

Regarding BACnet ... I know Sebastian is working hard on active bacnet ... he's 
currently implementing lots of missing stuff that we need for Mapped. So I 
would assume you should contact him and see if you have stuff he hasn't and 
then merge the things as far as it makes sense.

Chris


-Original Message-
From: Łukasz Dywicki  
Sent: Mittwoch, 15. Dezember 2021 13:33
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [LAZY-CONSENSUS] Clean up in our branches?

Few notes

Below contains mspec for LLDP which isn't update since a while, yet this might 
be something interesting from profinet perspective where lldp is actually being 
used  > 
feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol
(2 years)

These were initial works I did on DCP, the profinet2 is branch I worked with 
Adrian Lazar. I don't think these got merged, but Chris work on profinet 
superseded these  > 
feature/profinet
(2 years)
 >
feature/profinet2
(I think this is merged, right?)

This one was an attempt to swap bacnet driver from passive mode to normal, yet 
it did get stuck due to incompleteness of mspec back then (optional fields), I 
believe now this issue is solved with recent work from Sebastian  > 
feature/bacnet-active
(2 years)

I can move the LLDP and bacnet active branches to my fork and bring them back 
to origin if I have chance to work on them.
So from my perspective feel free to cleanup these.

Best,
Łukasz

On 15.12.2021 10:23, Christofer Dutz wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I have just tried to revive a not so old branch (feature/plc4net) and that is 
> a LOT of work.
> 
> Considering how many super-old branches we have; I would like to propose to 
> clean up all branches that haven't been touched for at least a year.
> (I know one or two I stripped from this list, because they were mine 
> and I want to update them or they are release branches, which I think 
> we should keep)
> 
> Right now, we have 48 branches.
> 
> The ones I would delete are:
> 
> Stale for longer than 12 months:
> feature/code-gen-julian ode-gen-julian> (3 years) 
> too-many-open-files -files> (2 years) 
> fix-netty-usage 
> (2 years) 
> fix-bytebuff-leaks eaks> (2 years) 
> feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base lc4x/tree/feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base> (2 years) 
> feature/optimizer-for-next-gen ature/optimizer-for-next-gen> (2 years) 
> develop-test (2 
> years) 
> feature/profinet > (2 years) 
> feature/plc-simulator -simulator> (2 years) 
> feature/bacnet-active net-active> (2 years) 
> bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel ree/bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel> (16 months) 
> feature/parser-tracing rser-tracing> (16 months) 
> issue/PLC4X-258 
> (13 months) 
> feature/grpc-proxy roxy> (13 months) 
> issue/PLC4X-252 
> (14 months)
> 
> Newer branches, that I think might be obsolete or forgotten to be deleted ...
> feature/sparkplug-gateway /sparkplug-gateway> (9 months) 
> fix/modbus_string ng> (is this obsolete? What's the status on this?) 
> feature/profinet2 t2> (I think this is merged, right?) 
> feature/updated-mspec-string ure/updated-mspec-string> (I think this is obsolete, right?) 
> issue/PLC4X-304 
> (I think this is merged, right?) 
> issue/PLC4X-311 
> (I think this is merged, right?) 
> s7event (I think this is 
> merged, right?)
> 
> So, anyone wanting to keep one of

Re: [LAZY-CONSENSUS] Clean up in our branches?

2021-12-15 Thread Łukasz Dywicki 

Few notes

Below contains mspec for LLDP which isn't update since a while, yet this 
might be something interesting from profinet perspective where lldp is 
actually being used
> 
feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol 
(2 years)


These were initial works I did on DCP, the profinet2 is branch I worked 
with Adrian Lazar. I don't think these got merged, but Chris work on 
profinet superseded these
> 
feature/profinet 
(2 years)
> 
feature/profinet2 
(I think this is merged, right?)


This one was an attempt to swap bacnet driver from passive mode to 
normal, yet it did get stuck due to incompleteness of mspec back then 
(optional fields), I believe now this issue is solved with recent work 
from Sebastian
> 
feature/bacnet-active 
(2 years)


I can move the LLDP and bacnet active branches to my fork and bring them 
back to origin if I have chance to work on them.

So from my perspective feel free to cleanup these.

Best,
Łukasz

On 15.12.2021 10:23, Christofer Dutz wrote:

Hi all,

I have just tried to revive a not so old branch (feature/plc4net) and that is a 
LOT of work.

Considering how many super-old branches we have; I would like to propose to 
clean up all branches that haven't been touched for at least a year.
(I know one or two I stripped from this list, because they were mine and I want 
to update them or they are release branches, which I think we should keep)

Right now, we have 48 branches.

The ones I would delete are:

Stale for longer than 12 months:
feature/code-gen-julian
 (3 years)
too-many-open-files 
(2 years)
fix-netty-usage (2 years)
fix-bytebuff-leaks (2 
years)
feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base
 (2 years)
feature/optimizer-for-next-gen
 (2 years)
develop-test (2 years)
feature/profinet (2 
years)
feature/plc-simulator
 (2 years)
feature/bacnet-active
 (2 years)
bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel
 (16 months)
feature/parser-tracing
 (16 months)
issue/PLC4X-258 (13 
months)
feature/grpc-proxy (13 
months)
issue/PLC4X-252 (14 
months)

Newer branches, that I think might be obsolete or forgotten to be deleted ...
feature/sparkplug-gateway
 (9 months)
fix/modbus_string (is 
this obsolete? What's the status on this?)
feature/profinet2 (I 
think this is merged, right?)
feature/updated-mspec-string
 (I think this is obsolete, right?)
issue/PLC4X-304 (I think 
this is merged, right?)
issue/PLC4X-311 (I think 
this is merged, right?)
s7event (I think this is merged, 
right?)

So, anyone wanting to keep one of these branches ... please reply in let's say 
the next 7 days and if I don't hear back from you, I'll delete the listed 
branches.

Chris

Re: [LAZY-CONSENSUS] Clean up in our branches?

2021-12-15 Thread Lukas Ott 
+1 for cleaning up the old branches

Am Mi., 15. Dez. 2021 um 10:23 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
christofer.d...@c-ware.de>:

> Hi all,
>
> I have just tried to revive a not so old branch (feature/plc4net) and that
> is a LOT of work.
>
> Considering how many super-old branches we have; I would like to propose
> to clean up all branches that haven't been touched for at least a year.
> (I know one or two I stripped from this list, because they were mine and I
> want to update them or they are release branches, which I think we should
> keep)
>
> Right now, we have 48 branches.
>
> The ones I would delete are:
>
> Stale for longer than 12 months:
> feature/code-gen-julian<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/code-gen-julian> (3 years)
> too-many-open-files<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/too-many-open-files> (2 years)
> fix-netty-usage (2
> years)
> fix-bytebuff-leaks
> (2 years)
> feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base>
> (2 years)
> feature/optimizer-for-next-gen<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/optimizer-for-next-gen> (2
> years)
> develop-test (2 years)
> feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol>
> (2 years)
> feature/profinet
> (2 years)
> feature/plc-simulator<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/plc-simulator> (2 years)
> feature/bacnet-active<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/bacnet-active> (2 years)
> bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel>
> (16 months)
> feature/parser-tracing<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/parser-tracing> (16 months)
> issue/PLC4X-258 (13
> months)
> feature/grpc-proxy
> (13 months)
> issue/PLC4X-252 (14
> months)
>
> Newer branches, that I think might be obsolete or forgotten to be deleted
> ...
> feature/sparkplug-gateway<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/sparkplug-gateway> (9 months)
> fix/modbus_string
> (is this obsolete? What's the status on this?)
> feature/profinet2
> (I think this is merged, right?)
> feature/updated-mspec-string<
> https://github.com/apache/plc4x/tree/feature/updated-mspec-string> (I
> think this is obsolete, right?)
> issue/PLC4X-304 (I
> think this is merged, right?)
> issue/PLC4X-311 (I
> think this is merged, right?)
> s7event (I think this is
> merged, right?)
>
> So, anyone wanting to keep one of these branches ... please reply in let's
> say the next 7 days and if I don't hear back from you, I'll delete the
> listed branches.
>
> Chris
>
>

[LAZY-CONSENSUS] Clean up in our branches?

2021-12-15 Thread Christofer Dutz 
Hi all,

I have just tried to revive a not so old branch (feature/plc4net) and that is a 
LOT of work.

Considering how many super-old branches we have; I would like to propose to 
clean up all branches that haven't been touched for at least a year.
(I know one or two I stripped from this list, because they were mine and I want 
to update them or they are release branches, which I think we should keep)

Right now, we have 48 branches.

The ones I would delete are:

Stale for longer than 12 months:
feature/code-gen-julian
 (3 years)
too-many-open-files 
(2 years)
fix-netty-usage (2 years)
fix-bytebuff-leaks (2 
years)
feature/big_integer_support_on_driver_base
 (2 years)
feature/optimizer-for-next-gen
 (2 years)
develop-test (2 years)
feature/link-layer-discovery-protocol
 (2 years)
feature/profinet (2 
years)
feature/plc-simulator
 (2 years)
feature/bacnet-active
 (2 years)
bugfix/close-eventloop-after-channel
 (16 months)
feature/parser-tracing
 (16 months)
issue/PLC4X-258 (13 
months)
feature/grpc-proxy (13 
months)
issue/PLC4X-252 (14 
months)

Newer branches, that I think might be obsolete or forgotten to be deleted ...
feature/sparkplug-gateway
 (9 months)
fix/modbus_string (is 
this obsolete? What's the status on this?)
feature/profinet2 (I 
think this is merged, right?)
feature/updated-mspec-string
 (I think this is obsolete, right?)
issue/PLC4X-304 (I think 
this is merged, right?)
issue/PLC4X-311 (I think 
this is merged, right?)
s7event (I think this is merged, 
right?)

So, anyone wanting to keep one of these branches ... please reply in let's say 
the next 7 days and if I don't hear back from you, I'll delete the listed 
branches.

Chris