RE: Why can't I re-run this program?

Hi Ray,

Thanks for the comments. I'm mostly interested in "adopting" a simple,
"hobbyist" subset of the Gcode commands, as I'd like to run part code on
more then one controller. I'm not really hand coding, I like to rely on
Vector CAD/CAM to generate the code for me. I guess the "programmer" in
me wants to think about reusable code, modularity, ease of
understanding, etc.

I was also wondering about conditional statements; if we have labels for
subroutines, do we have something in NGC or another "flavor" Gcode? We
could use labels for "jumps", i.e., "#IF V200 = 0 GOTO P20", Ok, the
syntax is not there yet (make it look a little like basic?). The V200
would be the variable, and P20 would signify the point in the program
that is labeled $20. Possibly "G23 #200 = 1.200 P20"?

Translators might be a good idea!

Alan KM6VV


Ray wrote:

>
> From: Jon Elson <elson@...>
> Subject: Re: RE: Why can't I re-run this program?
>
> >Alan Marconett KM6VV wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Ray, Tim,
> >>
> >> I've been studying the recent posts on stopping, I.E. M02 & M30, and
> >> also reading CNCpro's, and FlashCut's doc's. I under stand that there
> >> are variations in Gcode!
>
> >EMC does not now have subroutines. This is a major drawback for those
> >writing code by hand. I think there has been a TCL hack that makes the
> >GUI trick the system into doing subroutines.
>
> Jon is correct that EMC's g-code - RS-274NGC - does not support subroutines.
> He is also correct about the hacked code. I wrote a little Tcl/Tk code that
> will take g-code files and treat them as subroutines within a master
> program. It is not exactly easy to use but it's under the scripts menu if
> you are using tkemc.
>
> >> I was hoping to find a common denominator (majority vote) for doing
> >> subroutines. ;>)
> >>
> >> A common method of doing variables would also be nice!
>
> >If it wasn't part of the RS-274D spec, then every control manufacturer
> >was left to figure out a syntax on his own.
>
> And even if it was a part of the RS-274 documents, there was no
> required enforcement of the language. RS is an acro-whatever for
> recommended standard. I doubt that our vote will carry much weight with
> the big control making companies!
>
> Perhaps we should see this an an economic opportunity and write
> dictionaries and sell translators.
>
> Ray