New Poll! Programming Language of Choice?

[franji1]

The function is just a box, and the elements going into the box are just that elements, along with some lines.

With Ladder, you have to display the contact AND the element for EVERY element in the rung.  Lots of overhead for the contact, vs. one & or >=1 box (that is OR)

+-----+
|     |
|  &  |
|     |
+-----+

+-----+
|     |
| >=1 |
|     |
+-----+

[Controls Guy]

Still not quite getting it.  Are you saying a single AND box, for example, will take more than two inputs?  I thought in most implementations, you had to do n/2 boxes, then AND those results, then those results, etc.

[franji1]

Yes, that's why it's more compact, you can have 2..N inputs to a single & box.  Same with "add", so you can add 20 numbers with a single + FBD box.

[Vernon Leeper]

Some of you are over my head with this programming. I vote for the Stage, then ladder. One because I cut my teeth on the AB SLC100, did some real elimentry ladders and rewrites from some older TI units when they would crap out( years ago) .
I recently learned how to do the stage, I like it, I don't mind learning anything new.This function box, block, is that what is used for robotics or is it the flow charts? Either way I wouldn't mind learning it.
 I would like to learn what is used for CNC machines, lates, mills, ect. I plan to build a table top CNC machine for myself, been researching steppers, servos, and how to control them with the printer port from my PC.
 I would like to see ADC to come up with a DRUM that you can change timer values on the fly via HMI, that would useful to me, I could use that today at work on about 25 machines.....

[jimispeed]

I think stage is the best for most uses. Standard RLL works for simple projects (light on/light off). But having an electronics background, I REALLY enjoy Function Block Programming. I used it on a few seimens PLC projects and it was like drawing a schematic and putting it in a box and voila, project done.

[Loren Jones]

While I love Function Block Diagram in modicon Concept, there is one drawback: What about the poor bastich electrician trying to figure it out at zero-dark-thirty in the morning who has never seen it befoe and doesn't know what that little circle on the input means? Don't scoff. I've been there and been called in to explain to the _Electrical Superintendant_ what was going on because _he_ had not bothered to learn anything but RLL. For simplicity and uninterupted nights, I'll take RLL.

[franji1]

While I love Function Block Diagram in modicon Concept, there is one drawback: What about the poor bastich electrician trying to figure it out at zero-dark-thirty in the morning who has never seen it befoe and doesn't know what that little circle on the input means? Don't scoff. I've been there and been called in to explain to the _Electrical Superintendant_ what was going on because _he_ had not bothered to learn anything but RLL. For simplicity and uninterupted nights, I'll take RLL.

We will NEVER drop RLL.  However, we would LOVE to add other languages, but "all of them" is not the right answer. 

[dschlic1]

I also vote for Function Block Programming! Another feature, while related to programming but not, is how variables/tags are declared and used. The ability to define user data structures is very powerful. Another item is the ability to define a program hierarchy. A main program has several subroutines in it, and each subroutine has subroutine within it etc. The ability to see this graphically is very powerful especially for large programs. Stage programming does some of this, however many programs are not suited for stage programming.

[PLCJoe]

Function Block is nice and usefull. However when doing a lot of math or more complex equations structured text seems to work well as long as no data conversions are required while doing the structured text. How about allowing the user to create custom iboxes with the programming language of choice. And like some of the other users I'c like to see more structure options, Main program with other subtitled programs. They wouldn't even have to be subroutines just a way to divide the program up into subsections for ease of troubleshooting.

[uman]

Definitely FBD!
Please add this feature to the DirectSoft program.  FBD is among my top consideration, when selecting a PLC.
Is there any chance FBD will be included in the next version of DirectSoft or CLICK in the near future?

Jeff in Florida

[uman]

The results of this poll are meaningless without FBD as a choice.
How about a redo?

[franji1]

The results of this poll are meaningless without FBD as a choice.  How about a redo?

I definitely see your point, but the sample survey data is still somewhat valid due to having the "other" category.  If we assume all (currently) 14 "other" votes are for FBD (out of 140 current participants), it shows us the general popularity, which is all you can hope for in a random sample poll anyway.

[BobO]

Meaningless? Nah...just incomplete.

Probably would be good to add it, though, if we can do so without losing our statistics. I think there will be a few folks that vote for it, but I wouldn't anticipate it being in the top 3. But hey...I've been wrong before. 

[franji1]

Probably would be good to add it, though, if we can do so without losing our statistics

All you can do is start over with a new poll and delete this one 

[BobO]

Then again, some of those options aren't exactly going gang-busters. Might make sense to refactor and relaunch, making note of what we learned. In v2, we probably should have all of the 61131 languages represented. Our FBD fans will be thrilled.