Re: G-code---for the new millenium

Guy

Your desire to be able to read and write a
more natural command language than G code is
understandable. As you guessed, these codes
were conceived at at time when electronics
were much less capable that they are now.
Brute force simple was the order of the day.

Getting machine control and CAD/CAM programmers
to rally around a new standard will be difficult.
Might I suggest that a pre/post processor would
accomplish most of what you want and could be
used with existing programs. You could write
code in your new form and "compile" it into
conventional G code, and likewise process code
written by a CAD/CAM system to add human readable
comments.

Regards,
Steve Stallings

--- In CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@y..., "Guy Sirois" <guys@w...> wrote:
>
>
> I am thinking (dreaming) out loud here but here goes anyway.
>
> Like most people learning Gcode for the first time, I have some
problems
> remembering the code number for each action.
> As there was recently a thread on "variations" of Gcode (I saw that
in the
> archives) I was wondering if it would be feasible to give to our
> interpreting software, the ability to read text commands and/or
Gcode.
>
<snip>
>
> When Gcode was invented during the fifties, the "computers" probably
> couldn't deal with text commands, so maybe that's the reason we
are "stuck"
> with the numbers.
>
>
> Oh ! Time to wake-up.
> Was this a bad dream or not ?
>
>
> Guy Sirois