On Mon, Aug 17, 2015, at 10:46 AM, Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 17 August 2015 07:28:32 andy pugh wrote: > > > http://www.linuxcnc.org/docs/html/remap/structure.html#_optional_inter > >preter_features_ini_file_configuration_a_id_sub_ini_features_a > > > > The man-page says, quite correctly, that the option to read INI and > > HAL values in G-code should not be documented in that manual section. > > > > A decision probably needs to be made about whether the feature is "in" > > or "out", and if so the enabling flag should probably be defaulted in > > the "on" direction and those sections moved to a more logical place. > > My toothpick sized oar to steer this ship says it should be limited to > hal file access only as is now used. Gcode doesn't have a good excuse > to fiddle to fiddle with .ini stuffs. >
I don't see the difference. INI file data is machine specific. HAL file data is machine specific. G-code in theory is not machine specific, it is part specific. However, that theory has been broken for a while, since we have code remapping and other features. A particular machine config (INI+HAL files) can completely change the behavior of the G-code. Whether or not that is a good thing is something I don't neccessarily have an opinion on. But I can certainly sympathise with Jeff's point of view. -- John Kasunich jmkasun...@fastmail.fm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
