Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] re:g-code parsers

Les Watts wrote:

> Wow what quick responses!
>
> Terry, all I have is a book with the rs274-d standards. And yes
> quite a bit of variation is encountered. I guess one advantage of writing my
> own is that it would be easier to match a dialect later if needed.
>
> Andy, I took a look at emc's parser and although I don't follow all of c++
> it does look good. Very good references to rs274 as well.
>
> Allan, I had looked at sscanf() in my borland compiler stuff but it was not
> very well documented. It seems that it might be particularly suited to the
> task as I don't expect fixed fields- G01 for example could be written as g1
> as I read the standard.

As far as I know, it can also be expressed as G+0001.0000 and still be acceptable
to some systems. I'm sure others will reject that, however. I've even seen a few
examples that had things like M05.25 which meant something specific.
Ugh!

Jon