TIA portal - operand %

[steen.bill]

Anyone who knows if its possible to remove the % character from operand?

Im maybe oldschool, but like the simple M100.4

 

[Jeebs]

% is an IEC 61131 requirement for absolute adressing of physical resources: %M, %I, %Q.
Only way to get rid of it is using symbolic addressing.

 

[TurpoUrpo]

Its not like you would need to actually write it... So why need to get rid of it, just aesthetics?

 

[BobB]

% is an absolute PITA - have to use it in Schneider all the time - IEC rubbish - I use Omron and just type in the number - so much easier. Hate IEC rubbish - takes way too much time! Lose money going that way. Symbolic addressing is a PITA too - takes too much time. And people wonder why I do not use IEC stuff? Have to get on with it and make a $!

 

[balash]

Well maybe for original programmer symbolic is PITA, but it's opposite for maintenance. I'd say that depands of the complexity of the programm and/or future maintenance/upgrades

Also in TIA you do not have to write %. TIA adds it automatically as I recall.

 

[rQx]

You are right balash, it adds it automaticly so I don't see where the problem is? Write I0.0 and it just adds the % by itself..

 

[BobB]

With what I normally use balash all points have symbols and descriptions. The software gives you the choice of using symbolic or direct address programming. There is also no requirement to type in I or Q and also no requirement to type in the do either. For a bool I2021.07 you only have to type in 202107 and the software does the rest. It is very fast and easy but all the other stuff is there for those who want to use it.
It is quite different for us old guys who were originally brought up on hand help programmers and then early DOS programming software. I rarely use the mouse but have loads of shortcuts programmed in for the keyboard and can really motor when writing code.
The biggest problem I find with symbols is what some of the customers require. Typically I have one maniac customer who requires origin switchboard number, circuit breaker number, terminal group, cable number, destination switchboard number, terminal group, circuit breaker number, destination circuit - you finish up with MSB1_Q23_ISDC_1234_DB32_ODCV_Q37_PM395 or the like! That would be nightmare for a programmer and is I might add. The description has to have it all as well. Takes me twice as long to type the symbol and description than write and commission the software then I have to check for typos as well.
When I do a quote for him it costs him about twice as much as what I normally quote - then I am too expensive? He asked a friend of mine to quote a job for him as well and his price was much higher than mine!
It is all relative - that sort of nonsense and dyslexic, hard to use software cost as well as it takes more time to write code and commission the job.

 

[balash]

MSB1_Q23_ISDC_1234_DB32_ODCV_Q37_PM395 or the like!.

I agree that this kind of request is not only moronic and useless but counterproductive, yet some meaningfull name like Pump1RunCmd is certainly a big help.
As for old vs new ways of programming some things are improved more some less some none

 

[TurpoUrpo]

With what I normally use balash all points have symbols and descriptions. The software gives you the choice of using symbolic or direct address programming. There is also no requirement to type in I or Q and also no requirement to type in the do either. For a bool I2021.07 you only have to type in 202107 and the software does the rest. It is very fast and easy but all the other stuff is there for those who want to use it.
It is quite different for us old guys who were originally brought up on hand help programmers and then early DOS programming software. I rarely use the mouse but have loads of shortcuts programmed in for the keyboard and can really motor when writing code.
The biggest problem I find with symbols is what some of the customers require. Typically I have one maniac customer who requires origin switchboard number, circuit breaker number, terminal group, cable number, destination switchboard number, terminal group, circuit breaker number, destination circuit - you finish up with MSB1_Q23_ISDC_1234_DB32_ODCV_Q37_PM395 or the like! That would be nightmare for a programmer and is I might add. The description has to have it all as well. Takes me twice as long to type the symbol and description than write and commission the software then I have to check for typos as well.
When I do a quote for him it costs him about twice as much as what I normally quote - then I am too expensive? He asked a friend of mine to quote a job for him as well and his price was much higher than mine!
It is all relative - that sort of nonsense and dyslexic, hard to use software cost as well as it takes more time to write code and commission the job.

One can just simply write i0.0 if he wishes to. It does not make any difference to program if one uses symbol or absolute address.

Difference is having symbols at all. Its what matters to end user having to upkeep the system and find faults on equipment.

Next time. Quote normal + hourly for input all symbols to symbol table.

 

[BobB]

I agree completely balash - that means something and is sensible.