Numbered vs Named parameters - was Re: Re: Scanner/Digitizer skip function/probe details?

Alan M wrote

> I have been thinking of adding variables. NIST
> uses #nnn for a variable name. Not very intuitive (no disrespect
> intended as I admire the efforts of NIST; but variable NAMES are a lot
> easier to work with). CNCpro has variables, might be same/similar.
> What's the standard (ha)? I'm inclined to "do my own", you know how us
> programmer types are. ;>)

I've thought for years that manufacturers should use man-readable names
for parameters. For example, try finding the parameter for US standard
door open and clos on a Mazak (Mitusbishi) control. It will most likely
be an R???? parameter and will be only one bit of a longer parameter word.
You have to know octal conversion or have a calculator handy to change
these things.

But since the only parameters that are used in the EMC are for axis offsets
and such It never occurred to me that the present system would be a
problem for someone. I use these "variables" quite a bit in programming
and simply try to remember what I put in #1002 while writing code.

If we were to use some of these variables to hold longer term parameters
(like the kind of door switch format) you could easily write a small
bi-directional program that would take a man readable parameter name list
file and set each of them in the emc.var file that we were going to use.

But it would seem more practical to me to expand the emc.ini file to
include settings for the type of door open protocol (or any other
parametric machine or user or programmable variable) to be used with the
run. If this were done for a full, modern machine tool the ini file would
be expanded by many pages. --

Ray