Re: Ada for Automation

["Björn Lundin" <b.f.lundin@gmail.com>]

On 2014-11-18 12:03, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> Because OPC was totally unsuitable for the purpose. It was extremely slow,
> hugely difficult to configure and had to run on the same host. Some of the
> problems were lifted by the OPC UA, but it is still a monstrosity.

Indeed.

>> Yes, that is why I think Ada for Automation is interesting.
>> But in practice, i still see the dominating way of this kind of
>> communication to be TCP/IP with vendor-specific data content.


> I don't understand "but". In our middleware (which is in Ada) there is a
> well defined interface to design new device interfaces. In fact there is a
> ready-to use base device type for a custom TCP/IP connection based client.
> You would simply override Read and Write abstract operations. All automatic
> connection and reconnection stuff is handled by the base type.
> 

You are right, there should be not but in that sentence.
PLC-to-host communication is simple, stable and robust via TCP/IP and
custom protocols.

However, what I meant was that the OP's library would be very
interesting if I

>>> .... was given the opportunity to do conveyor system logic
>>>in say a raspberry pi, I'd definitely would look closer to you
>>>project.

That is if I was to control motors and read inputs myself.
But there seem to be no market for that, unless you supply the
hardware - as in conveyors/cranes/AGV ets - yourself.



--
Björn