I implemented a (medium to big) simulink model in v2012b.
I thought it would work also in 2010bSP2, but it didn't. Some mask blocks are not opening and other strange errors.
In previous versions of simulink there was a "save as simulink 201x" model to force compatibility, but I couldn't find it anymore in 2012b.
Any clues on how to avoid rework?
Starting with 2012b, and the new interface, they have moved the option to the menu:
File / Export Model to / Previous Version
The feature never seems to fully work, and I often get warnings when first loading a model into an older version, so I would recommend giving your model a thorough check over and test. I always save again from the correct version, to clear the warnings.
The refactoring for a New Simulink Version can show up at several points.
Your own libraries: There is a feature called "Forwarding Tables" that allows you to specify where a block in the new library is (I suppose you will have to refactor your libraries as well, and probably someone else uses those libraries too)
It sounds like a biiig hack (and it is) but i found it sometimes the path of lowest resistantce... Just open your model in the Editor of your choice and replace the block paths whith the common refactoring funcitons. It is terrible i know but Simulink really lacks of refactoring functions...
Related
I'm trying to simulate a SMPM with a VoltageController and a PWM in OpenModelica. After looking for old threads on the subject I found this one: PI-Controller doesn't reach reference value with inverter and PMSM in Modelica
Basically, that's exactly what I'm looking for. However, after copying #marco 's code and pasting it into Modelica, I have an error as seen in the attached image.
The PWM block is not displayed here. and the VoltageToDutyCycle block is missing a connection.
Can someone help me what's going on there, or even send me an executable version?
Maybe I'm doing something wrong, since I'm still a beginner at Modelica I don't want to rule that out ;)
I corrected the answer, it should work now.
Keep in mind, that this code was written with Modelica Standard Library (MSL) 3.2.3. The current version is 4.0.0. Either use the old MSL or
convert to the new version.
The missing MySignalPWM block was just the original block from the MSL. The class path is fixed now.
Regarding the connection: there is nothing missing. The third boolean input is disabled, but OpenModelica still displays it. Other Modelica tools are smarter and do not show disabled connectors. The thermal port in the center of this component should also not be visible.
I want to generate code from my state machine in Magic Draw. Magic Draw supports code generation for classes but does not include an option for state machine. I tried using SinelaboreRT software. However, it generates limited code. We need to manually add 'Main' function and other functions defined inside states. I wanted to know if it is possible to generate an executable or a C/C++/Java code file with all the code mentioned inside states as well a 'Main' function?
Yes, there are three main options that I am aware of 1) make your own code generator, 2) buy a commercial code generator e.g. LieberLieber provides what appears to be a fairly sophisticated one, or 3) use one of the open source code generators such as Papyrus-RT.
The first option isn't actually that difficult depending on your target language and framework. For my work at MITRE, I have written a generator to take properly formed Magicdraw models and create deploy-able Spring microservices. I used the Spring state machine library to simplify the STM code generation.
I personally found most convenient way to create state machine from models is UML or any other DSL is the combination of
Eclipse Papyrus / Eclipse XText / Eclipse XTend
there is also new kind in the block, if you don't want to work Eclipse based
Langium
but they are suffering at the moment little bit from being new but I will advice you check them every 6 months, they seem promising.
If you want to see how is it done, I have several blogs about it.
UML Based:
Akka Finite State Machine Generation Blog2
Papyrus and Spring State Machine
DSL Based:
XText and Spring State Machine
we are working on a project to come up with an intermediate representation for the code in terms of something called an assignment decision diagram. So it would be very helpful if someone can tell us how you guys are compiling the code and how to access the graphs generated during compilation i.e after parsing the code for grammar.
Even help regarding accessing the code after parsing of the compiler is fine. Any help regarding how to go about doing it is also appreciated.
Currently, there is not a well defined intermediate representation of Chisel as it goes between the user source code and the specified C++ or Verilog backends.
However, I believe this is a current project amongst the Chisel devs to break apart the backend and allow access to the IR (and allow for user-defined compiler passes).
In the meantime, check out Backend.scala (particularly the elaborate() method). That's where a lot of the magic originates. I believe it is possible to jump into the Scala command line in the middle of elaboration, which will give you access to the hardware tree representation, but I'm not sure how meaningful or useful that will be for you.
I find the requirements by searching for subsystems, as there seems to be no special block for requirements.
find_system(gcs,'LookUnderMasks','none','FollowLinks','off','BlockType','SubSystem','LinkStatus','none')
I get all the subsystems, including :
'test_simulinkmodel/SLVnV Internal Requirement Sub Block Name 1'
Is there some other way than to look for this (default?)string?
Also, when I know the path, is there some way to get the contents (Titles, descriptions?)
Which release are you using? In the latest release (R2013a), there is the System Requirements block. You can also generate (and customize) a requirements report, which should also work in earlier releases (I remember using it in R2011a for example).
In the R2017b release, MathWorks released a new product called Simulink Requirements that lets you author and manage requirements within Simulink. You can link requirements to design objects in Simulink as well as to test cases and their results.
I have just finished the first version of a Java 6 compiler plugin, that automatically generates wrappers (proxy, adapter, delegate, call it what you like) based on an annotation.
Since I am doing mixed Java/Scala projects, I would like to be able to use the same annotation inside my Scala code, and get the same generated code (except of course in Scala). That basically means starting from scratch.
What I would like to do, and for which I haven't found an example yet, is how do I generate the code inside a Scala compiler plugin in the same way as in the Java compiler plugin. That is, I match/find where my annotation is used, get the AST for the annotated interface, and then ask the API to give me a Stream/Writer in which I output the generated Scala source code, using String manipulation.
That last part is what I could not find. So how do I tell the API to create a new Scala source file, and give me a Stream/Writer/File/Handle, so I can just write in it, and when I'm done, the Scala compiler compiles it, within the same run in which the plugin was invoked?
Why would I want to do that? Firstly, because than both plugins have the same structure, so maintenance is easy. Secondly, I want to open source it, and there is just no way to support every option that anyone would want, so I expect potential users to want to extend the generation with their own code. This will be a lot easier for them if they just have to do some printf(), instead of learning the AST API (this also applies to me).
Short answer:
It can't be done
Long answer:
You could conceivably generate your source file and push that through a parser instance within your plugin. But not in any way that's likely to be of any use to you, because you'd now have a bigger problem to contend with:
In order to grab all the type/name information for generating the delagate/proxy, you'll have to pick up the annotated type's AST after it has run through both the namer and typer phases (which are inseperable). The catch is that any attempts to call your generated code will already have failed typechecking, the compiler will have thrown an error, and any further bets are off.
Method synthesis is possible in limited cases, so long as you can somehow fool the typechecker for just long enough to get your code generated, which is the trick I pulled with my Autoproxy 'lite' plugin. Even then, you're far better off working with TreeDSL to generate code instead of pumping out raw source.
Kevin is entirely correct, but just for completeness it's worth mentioning that there is another alternative - write a compiler plugin that generates source. This is the approach that I've adopted in Borachio. It's not a very satisfactory solution, but it can be made to work.
Edit - I just reread your question and realised that you're actually asking about generating source anyway
So there is no support for this directly, but it's basically just a question of opening a file and writing the relevant "print" statements. There's no way to invoke the compiler "inside" a plugin AFAIK, but I've written an sbt plugin which hides most of the complexity of invoking the compiler twice.