Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Extension MQTT Interface - read symbols by identifier #77

Open
StGoebel opened this issue Jun 10, 2021 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #80
Open

Extension MQTT Interface - read symbols by identifier #77

StGoebel opened this issue Jun 10, 2021 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #80
Assignees

Comments

@StGoebel
Copy link
Collaborator

StGoebel commented Jun 10, 2021

What is the issue?

When you want to get the variables of a TwinCAT project, always the whole variable list of the project is extracted.
Sometimes you just want to control a subset of all the variables. The issue is to provide a functionality, such that you can
mark with comments the variables you want to get and only those variables will be extracted.

What is the current application?

The module parsing_and_assignment contains the functions, that extract the variable list of the TwinCAT project. You provide
either a text file (*.GVL) containing the variables list or a an ADS connection to the corresponding function in
parsing_and_assignment (for example parsing_and_assignment.getADSVariables(gvl_file)) and the functions return
the variables categorized in a publish- and a subscribe-set.

How do we want to solve it?

To parsing_and_assignment the functions "getMarkedADSVariables" and "getMarkedADSvarsFromSymbols" will be added.
One function gets the marked variables from a text file, the other on directly from the ADS connection. The desired
variables have to be commented with "//#" in the TwinCAT project, the functions will then only extract the variables marked
with the respective comment.

@StGoebel StGoebel linked a pull request Jun 30, 2021 that will close this issue
@StGoebel
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Hi @ErnestoVivas, the functions are working!
Two points we should work on:

  • the marker for identifying the symbol which should be published should not have to stand alone in the comment
  • variables inside a structure should be considered

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants