F_MOVE handling struct

[rudoc]

Out of curiosity, I tested the F_MOVE function block with a structure and encountered a few points of interest that may help with development:

1. Incorrect connection validation — the expanded pin connection check appears faulty:

2. When mapping F_MOVE with an expected expanded pin, the pin does not actually expand correctly in the Resource editor.
   

When pins are hidden, it results in dangling (unconnected) connections. it seems validation check is inverted, because the rest pins except required could be expanded in Resource.

3. During deployment, I encountered several errors while writing parameters for the test application:

Console output

<!--  Connected to device: FORTE_PC -->

Deploying: EMB_RES
<!-- 192.168.137.111:61499: EMB_RES -->
<Request ID="9" Action="WRITE">
    <Connection Source="10" Destination="fmovedemoApp.F_MOVE_1.VAR2"/>
</Request>

<Response ID="9" Reason="NO_SUCH_OBJECT">
  
</Response>


<!-- 192.168.137.111:61499: EMB_RES -->
<Request ID="10" Action="WRITE">
    <Connection Source="'TST'" Destination="fmovedemoApp.F_MOVE_1.VAR3"/>
</Request>

<Response ID="10" Reason="NO_SUCH_OBJECT">
  
</Response>


Deployed: EMB_RES with 11 elements
<!--  Disconnected from device: FORTE_PC -->

Not sure if parameter assignment is valid here, but I assume F_MOVE is meant to eventually replace STRUCT_MUX/STRUCT_DEMUX.

4diac IDE 
Version: 3.1.0
Build id: 2026-02-17_1402
OS: Windows 11, v.10.0, x86_64 / win32
Java vendor: Eclipse Adoptium
Java runtime version: 25.0.1+8-LTS
Java version: 25.0.1

Apologies for combining multiple issues in one report — they all relate to the same function block, so I considered it reasonable to group them together.

[mx990]

I have provided a fix for the deployment problem in #2173.

[azoitl]

Connection creation fix is provided in: #2211

[azoitl]

#2212 fixes the last problem with the mapping and the connection handling of mapped FBs with member access pins.