RE: Thoughts on Gcode interpreters and CNC controls....

Alan wrote:

>Please, at least make it like 'C'. And I guess the current thinking
>(thinkers) would say make it like JAVA. Oh well.

Sorry Alan, but I'm not a C fan. My compiled BASIC has pointers,
better string functions, inline assembly, AND is not so D***
syntactically challenging. ANYONE can actually READ the code and
understand! Even if ya don't own a white shirt. EMC IS forcing the
issue, tho, and I now know more C++ than I EVER wanted to...

I believe in the military axiom, "designed by genius's, so idiots can
use it." IMO, the compilers should get smarter, so we can stay
dumber. Same with the gcode thing. And why I'm pushing for some
standardization and/or simplification or just plain UPDATE of the 274
standard.

>I downloaded NIST RS274/NGC Interpreter, vers 3. A fine document. NO,
>I'm not even part of the way through it yet, but I wish I had it
>earlier. Art and anyone else writing gcode interpreters, Gotta Have!
>Nice to see "Thomas R. Kramer" on the cover. NOW we know who to ask!

You should know Tom is doin' the gcode thing as well as he can, which
is REALLY WELL but his real Joys lie elsewhere. PLEASE don't
innundate him with questions! But if you need some clarification of
the manual, or a suggestion for how it may be made more useful, he's
interested.

Ballendo