Welcome to our new forum
All users of the legacy CODESYS Forums, please create a new account at account.codesys.com. But make sure to use the same E-Mail address as in the old Forum. Then your posts will be matched.
Close
If you just compare the performance of data-transport then both methods are same, also the VAR_IN_OUT is a pointer to the data. With using the VAR_IN_OUT the compiler can checke if there is data connected, if the connected data type is correct, and there is absolutely no risk of pointing to wrong data (caused by a onlinechange).
So my favorite is : VAR_IN_OUT
If you where asking the same question in the V3 Forum you got more options (References + Interfaces) Which are defenitly also good ways to transfer "large" amounts of data with a good performance.
Regards
Ralph
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi,
what the better way in term of performance when we have 1 FB Master and n FB Slave and we need exchange information between them.
1) Create a struture and pass it with a VAR_IN_OUT to master and slave FB
2) Create a pointer parameter to master in the FB slave
Thanks in advance.
var in out means you will have a bigger structure.
better one structure for out and another for Input.
see w www.oscat.de w for functions to do communications.
If you just compare the performance of data-transport then both methods are same, also the VAR_IN_OUT is a pointer to the data. With using the VAR_IN_OUT the compiler can checke if there is data connected, if the connected data type is correct, and there is absolutely no risk of pointing to wrong data (caused by a onlinechange).
So my favorite is : VAR_IN_OUT
If you where asking the same question in the V3 Forum you got more options (References + Interfaces) Which are defenitly also good ways to transfer "large" amounts of data with a good performance.
Regards
Ralph