By the way, I notice neither method updates the VATs. Is there a way to get the VATs to update too?
Not that I know of. The VATs don't seem to follow the Symbol Priority even though you can enter the variables symbolically. Therefore I sort of gave up on VATs a long time ago. I'll use them day to day for debugging, but I find it more valuable to arrage my data in the DBs very logically and then monitor them online.
The Check Block Consistency works well with Step 7 version 5.3 but it was painfully slow with version 5.2. Even with version 5.3 and a large program, I have time to straighten up some of those unsightly paper piles on my desk.
I haven't used V5.3 yet, so I don't have anything to compare it to. But yes, it can be slow. Usually I schedule my compiles during breakfast or lunch so it can plod away on its own....
When I change a symbol name (i.e. correct spelling) in a DB or UDT, I'll switch switch the Address Priority to Absolute Address and then run the Check Block Consistency>Complile All. This will change the symbol in the DBs, FCs, and FBs. I then switch Address Priority back to Symbol. I don't have to open each block and update it. I think this is what paraffin power is after.
Ok, I see what you mean now. Still, it sounds scary. I'm afraid that it would somehow screw up some addressing somewhere and it wouldn't be evident until my code blew up (I've seen this behavior in earlier versions, especially if I inserted a new bool
inside an existing struct of bools.) But if you're confortable with this procedure, go for it.
One thing you might experiment with is the type of Symbolic Priority. If you look at the selections, you'll see that one option is "For All Accesses (I,Q,M,T,C and DB). I've never tried this, but maybe that option handles misspelling a little better.