> Dear All,
>
> Does the "wait" record work under 3.13.4?
>
> I noticed that the support for this is included in the distrubution
> but is commented out of the default "base.dbd" and "baseLIBOBJS".
Andy,
I don't know about 3.13.4, but it looks like it disappears altogether (in base)
in 3.14.0alpha2. I would strongly recommend converting wait records to
calcout records. The wait record was developed before "dynamic link fields"
existed so it uses different field types (strings) to specify input links
and it has its own library of CA routines (recDynLink). All this should be
left behind and the calcout record should be used (which implements things
using standard system software).
Ned
>
> I uncommented it in my build but I'm getting some unexpected
> results from using it.
>
> Is the "calcout" record a replacement for the "wait" record in 3.13?
>
> If so, then I expect moving an application from 3.12->3.13
> will mean I either have to replace all instances of "wait" with a
> "calcout" or take a closer look at why the "wait" isn't doing as
> I expect. Can anyone comment on similiar problems?
>
> Does anyone have a Capfast symbol for the "calcout" record?
>
> Thanks in advance for your help,
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andy
>
> --
> Observatory Sciences Limited Email: [email protected]
> William James House Tel: 44 - (0)1223 - 508257
> Cowley Road Fax: 44 - (0)1223 - 508258
> Cambridge, CB4 0WX, UK http://www.observatorysciences.co.uk
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
wait record, calcout record and 3.13.4 Andy Foster
- Next:
Re: wait record, calcout record and 3.13.4 Pam Gurd
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
<2001>
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: wait record, calcout record and 3.13.4 Pam Gurd
- Next:
iseg high voltage supply Porter, Rodney
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
<2001>
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|