Loxone Support Community

Find answers, ask questions and become part of the Loxone Community.

Loxone Support Community › Category: Loxone Config › Building custom block on top of existing blocks
0 Vote Up Vote Down
3 years ago
Building custom block on top of existing blocks

Hello,

I have general question – is it possible to build my own blocks on top of existing blocks?

Example: I would like to have 3 input AND, i.e. A and B and C (just a logical and). As the standard AND block can have only two inputs (yes I know I can join the wires, but lets pretend it is not possible), I would need to create this functionality by two blocks ((A and and C). If I want to use it on multiple places, I need to copy-paste it everywhere. It would be simple to create custom 3AND blocks (for example) that uses the two AND blocks under the hood, but in the Loxone Config looks as just a simple block.

This example is the simplest one I can come with, it would be of course possible to hide as many blocks as needed.

I didn’t find anything like this in documentation (except PicoC, which creates a scratch new block). I believe it would be very helpful (honestly I can’t believe it is not possible in the first place) and even it would not be hard to integrate into the Loxone Config, as it would just hide the blocks underneath and when uploaded to miniserver it would be replaced by them. The miniserver wouldn’t need to change at all.

Is there some place I may "propose" this functionality to Loxone? Would you found it useful?

Thanks

1 Answers
0 Vote Up Vote Down
3 years ago

Hi

Thank you for your question. I’m afraid this is not possible, and would be almost impossible to provide functionality to ‘create’ function blocks freely (hundreds of hours are spent to create a function block so the time investment to create a ‘free assignment’ one and then test as many possible iterations of it as possible for bugs would be an enormous effort.)

This is why as you have said core function blocks like AND exist, and as in your example if 3x inputs need to be compared to AND an AND block.

KR

Hugh