I need to obtain an average value of my input signals from mitsubishi input module Q64AD. I'm working in GX Works 2 in structured text.
This is how i used to obtain average value in Codesys:
timer_sr(IN:= NOT timer_sr.Q , PT:= T#5s );
SUM1:= SUM1 + napr1;
Nsum:=Nsum + 1;
IF timer_sr.Q THEN
timer_sr(IN:= NOT timer_sr.Q , PT:= T#5s);
outsr := SUM1 /Nsum;
Nsum := 0;
SUM1 := 0;
END_IF;
napr1 - is value from module
This piece of code is not working in GX Works 2, and i think because SUM1 is not an INT data type, but just a Word[signed] type.
Is there a way to make SUM1 an INT type or may be there is another logic to that solution?
In other platforms it should work but the compiler gives a warning so I guess it will still compile? Of course, if the value is negative there will be problems.
You can convert a WORD to INT by the IEC function WORD_TO_INT. I'm not sure how well your system follows the standard but if it does, try the following:
WORD_TO_INT(SUM1). If the SUM1 > 65535 then there will be problems as the upper bound of INTis 32767.
If this doesn't help, could you provide more details? How is it not workin?
Ps. The WORD is unsigned data type, not signed as you wrote.
Related
I have declared an array
type datastream is array(0 to 10) of signed (5 downto 0);
For simulation, I want to display the array as integer-numbers
So I created
type datastream_int is array(0 to 10) of integer;
and
signal DIN_ARRAY: datastream;
signal DIN_ARRAY_int: datastream_int;
...
DIN_ARRAY_real <= datastream_int(DIN_ARRAY);
But it fails. How to convert it? Dont want to use a for loop
The numeric_std package, that I assume you are using, provides a to_integer function to convert from a single signed value to a single integer object. For an array, you're going to have to use a for loop. Something like this:
for i in DIN_ARRAY'range loop
DIN_ARRAY_int <= to_integer(DIN_ARRAY(i));
end loop;
You could also provide a conversion function (it will also contain a for loop)
function datastream_to_datastream_int( d : datastream ) return datastream_int is
variable r : datastream_int;
begin
for i in d'range loop
r(i) := to_integer(d(i));
end loop;
return r;
end function;
....
--no loop required
DIN_ARRAY_int <= datastream_to_datastream_int(DIN_ARRAY);
So, there will be a for loop somewhere.
Your code fails because you have attempted a type conversion, which is only allowed between similar types - ie. array or record types where the element types match between the two types.
PS. VHDL 2008 provides an integer_vector type in the std.standard library (which is included by default) which may help by allowing you to do this:
signal DIN_ARRAY_int: integer_vector(DIN_ARRAY'range);
If you did decide to keep datastream_int as per your original, you could type convert it to an integer_vector, because the types are similar:
my_iv <= integer_vector(DIN_ARRAY_int);
`define NUM 100
program test;
function automatic int sum(int n);
if(n <= 1)
return n;
else
return n + sum(n-1);
endfunction
initial begin
$display("sum(%0d)=%d",`NUM, sum(`NUM));
end
endprogram
Above is a piece of code that did a recursive exercise of the sum of incremental integers from 1 to NUM. The result is as expected when I ran it in vcs/xcelium/Questa on the EDA playground.
sum(100)= 5050
However, when I tried to make a modify on the lifetime of function int sum(int n):
program test;
function int sum(int n);
if(n <= 1)
return n;
else
return n + sum(n-1);
endfunction
initial begin
$display("sum(%0d)=%d",`NUM, sum(`NUM));
end
endprogram
The results are quite interesting:
VCS : sum(100)= 100
Cadence xcelium: sum(100)= 5050
Questa : sum(100)= 5050
I went back to the IEEE1800-2017 to find out the default lifetime of methods in the program block but I didn't get the explicit description about that. Would someone help me to clarify this?
https://www.edaplayground.com/x/v3gb
The differences you are seeing are not due to the lifetime of the sum method—it's the order of evaluation of function calls within the expression n + sum(n-1), which is indeterminate. If you reverse the expression to sum(n-1) + n, all tools give the correct result for a function with a static lifetime.
BTW, I strongly recommend that you never use program blocks in SystemVerilog. Use modules instead.
I'm trying to implement the 'Sport Scheduling Problem' (with a Round-Robin approach to break symmetries). The actual problem is of no importance. I simply want to declare the value at x[1,1] to be the set {1,2} and base the sets in the same column upon the first set. This is modelled as in the code below. The output is included in a screenshot below it. The problem is that the first set is not printed as a set but rather some sort of range while the values at x[2,1] and x[3,1] are indeed printed as sets and x[4,1] again as a range. Why is this? I assume that in the declaration of x that set of 1..n is treated as an integer but if it is not, how to declare it as integers?
EDIT: ONLY the first column of the output is of importance.
int: n = 8;
int: nw = n-1;
int: np = n div 2;
array[1..np, 1..nw] of var set of 1..n: x;
% BEGIN FIX FIRST WEEK $
constraint(
x[1,1] = {1, 2}
);
constraint(
forall(t in 2..np) (x[t,1] = {t+1, n+2-t} )
);
solve satisfy;
output[
"\(x[p,w])" ++ if w == nw then "\n" else "\t" endif | p in 1..np, w in 1..nw
]
Backend solver: Gecode
(Here's a summarize of my comments above.)
The range syntax is simply a shorthand for contiguous values in a set: 1..8 is a shorthand of the set {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8}, and 5..6 is a shorthand for the set {5,6}.
The reason for this shorthand is probably since it's often - and arguably - easier to read the shorthand version than the full list, especially if it's a long list of integers, e.g. 1..1024. It also save space in the output of solutions.
For the two set versions, e.g. {1,2}, this explicit enumeration might be clearer to read than 1..2, though I tend to prefer the shorthand version in all cases.
I would like to use the pseudo_encrypt function mentioned a few times on StackOverflow to make my IDs look more random: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Pseudo_encrypt
How can I customize this to output unique "random" numbers for just me. I read somewhere that you can just change the 1366.0 constant, but I don't want to take any risks with my IDs as any potential ID duplicates would cause major issues.
I really have no idea what each constant actually does, so I don't want to mess around with it unless I get some direction. Does anyone know which constants I can safely change?
Here it is:
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION "pseudo_encrypt"("VALUE" int) RETURNS int IMMUTABLE STRICT AS $function_pseudo_encrypt$
DECLARE
l1 int;
l2 int;
r1 int;
r2 int;
i int:=0;
BEGIN
l1:= ("VALUE" >> 16) & 65535;
r1:= "VALUE" & 65535;
WHILE i < 3 LOOP
l2 := r1;
r2 := l1 # ((((1366.0 * r1 + 150889) % 714025) / 714025.0) * 32767)::int;
r1 := l2;
l1 := r2;
i := i + 1;
END LOOP;
RETURN ((l1::int << 16) + r1);
END;
$function_pseudo_encrypt$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
for bigint's
CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION "pseudo_encrypt"("VALUE" bigint) RETURNS bigint IMMUTABLE STRICT AS $function_pseudo_encrypt$
DECLARE
l1 bigint;
l2 bigint;
r1 bigint;
r2 bigint;
i int:=0;
BEGIN
l1:= ("VALUE" >> 32) & 4294967295::bigint;
r1:= "VALUE" & 4294967295;
WHILE i < 3 LOOP
l2 := r1;
r2 := l1 # ((((1366.0 * r1 + 150889) % 714025) / 714025.0) * 32767*32767)::bigint;
r1 := l2;
l1 := r2;
i := i + 1;
END LOOP;
RETURN ((l1::bigint << 32) + r1);
END;
$function_pseudo_encrypt$ LANGUAGE plpgsql;
Alternative solution: use different ciphers
Other cipher functions are now available on postgres wiki. They're going to be significantly slower, but aside from that, they're better candidates for generating customized random-looking series of unique numbers.
For 32 bit outputs, Skip32 in plpgsql will encrypt its input with a 10 bytes wide key, so you just have to choose your own secret key to have your own specific permutation (the particular order in which the 2^32 unique values will come out).
For 64 bit outputs, XTEA in plpgsql will do similarly, but using a 16 bytes wide key.
Otherwise, to just customize pseudo_encrypt, see below:
Explanations about pseudo_encrypt's implementation:
This function has 3 properties
global unicity of the output values
reversability
pseudo-random effect
The first and second property come from the Feistel Network, and as already explained in #CodesInChaos's answer, they don't depend on the choice of these constants: 1366 and also 150889 and 714025.
Make sure when changing f(r1) that it stays a function in the mathematical sense, that is x=y implies f(x)=f(y), or in other words the same input must always produce the same output. Breaking this would break the unicity.
The purpose of these constants and this formula for f(r1) is to produce a reasonably good pseudo-random effect. Using postgres built-in random() or similar method is not possible because it's not a mathematical function as described above.
Why these arbitrary constants? In this part of the function:
r2 := l1 # ((((1366.0 * r1 + 150889) % 714025) / 714025.0) * 32767)::int;
The formula and the values 1366, 150889 and 714025 come from Numerical recipes in C (1992, by William H.Press, 2nd ed.), chapter 7: random numbers, specifically p.284 and 285.
The book is not directly indexable on the web but readable through an interface here: http://apps.nrbook.com/c/index.html .It's also cited as a reference in various source code implementing PRNGs.
Among the algorithms discussed in this chapter, the one used above is very simple and relatively effective. The formula to get a new random number from a previous one (jran) is:
jran = (jran * ia + ic) % im;
ran = (float) jran / (float) im; /* normalize into the 0..1 range */
where jran is the current random integer.
This generator will necessarily loop over itself after a certain number of values (the "period"), so the constants ia, ic and im have to be chosen carefully for that period to be as large as possible. The book provides a table p.285 where constants are suggested for various lengths of the period.
ia=1366, ic=150889 and im=714025 is one of the entries for a period of
229 bits, which is way more than needed.
Finally the multiplication by 32767 or 215-1 is not part of the PRNG but meant to produce a positive half-integer from the 0..1 pseudo-random float value. Don't change that part, unless to widen the blocksize of the algorithm.
This function looks like a blockcipher based on a Feistel network - but it's lacking a key.
The Feistel construction is bijective, i.e. it guarantees that there are no collisions. The interesting part is: r2 := l1 # f(r1). As long as f(r1) only depends on r1 the pseudo_encrypt will be bijective, no matter what the function does.
The lack of key means that anybody who knows the source code can recover the sequential ID. So you're relying on security-though-obscurity.
The alternative is using a block cipher which takes a key. For 32 bit blocks there are relatively few choices, I know of Skip32 and ipcrypt. For 64 bit blocks there are many ciphers to choose from, including 3DES, Blowfish and XTEA.
I am working on a property of a given set of natural numbers and it seems difficult to compute. I build a function 'fun' which takes two inputs, one is the cardinal value and another is the set. If the set is empty then fun should return 0 because fun depends on the product of the set and fun on all subsets of the complement set.
For clarification here is an example:
S is a set given S={1,2,3,4}. The function fun(2,S) is defined as
fun(2,S)=prod({1,2})*[fun(1,{3}) + fun(1,{4}) + fun(2,{3,4})] +
prod({1,3})*[fun(1,{2}) + fun(1,{4}) + fun(2,{2,4})] +
prod({1,4})*[fun(1,{3}) + fun(1,{2}) + fun(2,{2,3})] +
prod({2,3})*[fun(1,{4}) + fun(1,{1}) + fun(2,{1,4})] +
prod({2,4})*[fun(1,{1}) + fun(1,{3}) + fun(2,{3,1})] +
prod({3,4})*[fun(1,{1}) + fun(1,{2}) + fun(2,{1,2})]
prod is defined as the product of all elements in a set, for example
prod({1,2})=2;
prod({3,2})=6
I am trying to compute the function fun using recursive method in MATLAB but it's not working. The base case is the cardinal value should be more than zero that means there should be at least one element in the set other wise prod will be zero and fun will return zero.
Update Pseudo code:
fun(i,S)
if |S|=1 && i!=0
return prod(S)
else if i==0
return 0
else
prod(subset s', s' is a subset of S and |s'|=i)*(sum over fun((for i=1 to m),{S-s'}), m=|S-s'|) //I don't know how to write code for this part and need help.
end if
end fun
prod(s)
n=|s|
temp=1
for i=1 to n
temp *=s(i) //s(1) is the 1st element of s
end for
return temp
end prod
Thanks.
With the pseudo code you added to your question it's nearly impossible to implement the function. Everything is put into one line which is incomplete (at least the outer sum is missing).
1) Formalize your algorithm in a way it can be used to implement. The following pseudo code is probably not correct because I don't exactly know what you want, but it should give an idea how to do it.
fun(i,S)
if i==0
return 0
else if |S|=1
return S
else
r=0
for s1 in subsets of S with size i
f=0
for s2 in subsets of setdiff(S,s') with size <=i
f=f+fun(s2,|s2|)
end
r=r+prod(s1)*f
end for
end if
end fun
2) use arrays [1,2,3,4] instead of cells {1,2,3,4}
3) prod is a built-in function, no need to reimplement it.