From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,
	FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: =?UTF-8?B?QmrDtnJuIEx1bmRpbg==?= <b.f.lundin@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ada for Automation
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:27:49 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <m4fdt8$tfc$1@dont-email.me>
References: <3e877e3f-c9ad-48a5-941d-08a7f5c3f317@googlegroups.com>
 <m4f190$hhq$1@dont-email.me> <18cxzhton11yu.1s3cu5zea772b.dlg@40tude.net>
 <m4f7p3$7lt$1@dont-email.me> <1uhe64g68og8k.16z0icy3wfdhu.dlg@40tude.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:26:16 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="23e59b4906029a0ce22afc4c4b1f25ee";
	logging-data="30188"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18CUN4g+Qywm3a2FRxPfbxI"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.1.2
In-Reply-To: <1uhe64g68og8k.16z0icy3wfdhu.dlg@40tude.net>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QN0ymWVtzwd2Di1xhA6V64fRdVU=
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:23520
Date: 2014-11-18T13:27:49+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

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