background of the question:

spurred by yesterdays irc discussion I thought through the remapped G0 example 
which came up there, and the M6 and M69 case

what I took from it was that it using the builtin behaviour and just draping a 
few lines around it might be a more common use case than defining a completely 
new code from scratch - like in the remapped M6 example Chris came up with: 
default M6 behaviour plus tool length touchoff plus G10 L2 

I added M69 as an alias for M6 so it could be referred to in a G6 remap 
procedure, but it smells like a cludge - it litters the namespace and is 
non-obvious

that brought me on the following idea: maybe it makes sense remapping  
*existing* codes behaves as follows:

- when you remap an existing code, and, say, execute a replacement ngc 
procedure,
- AND that replacement procedure refers to the code being remapped 
- then that 'inner' remapped code will always refer to the builtin semantics (*)


(1) As it currently stands:
REMAP=M6 ngc=foo.ngc

o<foo> sub (wants to execute builtin M6 behaviour and then some)
M69 (cludge: alias original M6 to M69)
...
o<foo> endsub

(2) After the change, you could do this:
REMAP=M6 ngc=foo.ngc

o<foo> sub (wants to execute builtin M6 behaviour and then some)
M6 (refer to the code being remapped and get the builtin behaviour)
...
o<foo> endsub

----

this strikes me as a more natural way to deal with it and reuse builtin 
functionality, and in that case I would see a use case to make many, if not all 
existing codes 
remappable

-m

(*) this case currently causes a remapping recursion with an error message, and 
therefore is an error situation. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn 
about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. 
http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to