Open tobolar opened 6 years ago
MartinOtter
commented
6 years ago Please look at the blocks where these interfaces are used (like MultiSum). The purpose was to have "smaller" blocks for "trivial" operations like "*" or "+". Just try it out by dragging the corresponding blocks.
tobolar
commented
6 years ago I understand that it is reasonable to have smaller blocks in some cases. But my impression is that this decission is fully arbitrary.
Regarding only MISO partial blocks, there is set initialScale=0.06 in
but no such definition in (complementary?)
The situation is even worse for SISO. initialScale=0.06 is set only in
but no such definition e. g. in
And there are far more partial blocks MIMO, SIMO.
But maybe better to consider the issue from another perspective. We can compare the blocks package-wise, e.g. from Logical and MathBoolean since the blocks in those packages often look very similar. Then:
Modelica.Blocks.Logical: Blocks extend mostly from partialBooleanSISO and have "standard" size.Modelica.Blocks.MathBoolean: Block extends from PartialBooleanMISO or PartialBooleanSISO_small and are scaled.So my question is actually how is the decission procedure whether (and how) the blocks are scaled per default or not. Once such the procedure is clear, it should be documented in
Modelica.UsersGuide.Conventions.Icons.
tobolar
commented
3 years ago Resolve #2164 first.
In the following blocks, there is used initialScale=0.06 without obvious benefit.
If there is a benefit, the same scaling should be used consequently within other (partial) classes such as Modelica.Blocks.Interfaces.SISO.
In contrast, in Modelica.Blocks.Interfaces.PartialBooleanSISO_small, the name at least indicates the scaling. Though it may not be obvious to the user what feature is reflected by "small". See also #2419.