On 10/3/2024 9:56 AM, John Purcell wrote:
Should I use Logix or LogixNG? ?Since there is no prior usage of either I’m assuming the better choice is LogixNG, it being the current rendition.
You can choose either Logix or LogixNG. I personally choose Logix, because my signaling solutions _need_ to support older JMRI versions of some of my users. LogixNG has had an annoying challenge of using new XML constructs as newer LogixNG solutions have been introduced, making it difficult for me to support older JMRI versions.
Does Logix replace all the SML assigned to that particular mast? ?Or perhaps it operates alongside and augments SML?
Augments. SML calculates its Aspects. Much of the time, the SML-calculated Aspects are just fine, and are "left alone". But not every time. The Logix which I provided deals with _one_ route thru the interlocking. It is sensitive to the SML-calculated Aspect(s) (that I dont want!) for the specific _route_, and calculates new a new Aspect for that route.
If SML produces multiple "wrong-for your situation" cases, then you may need multiple Logix (or LogixNG) conditionals; at least one conditional per "route". In this particular interlocking, I have multiple Logix "overrides" on SML, because I was unable to "force" SML and "speeds" and "special, user-defined" aspects to solve every "odd situation".
For example, I have an "Over-and-back" signal for the same "route" but in the opposite direction.
?If I am reading your example correctly, Logix is looking at the aspect SML is displaying for mast M134 Main EB, combining that with other turnout and sensor states, then overriding SML to force the desired aspect on mast M134 Main EB.
Correct.
