That was exactly my plan as well. Use a sub to make it more in line with
the way that linuxCNC already does things.

There have been a few attempts at g71 in the past, but they were all
half-baked from what I could find. None that I found implemented g70.
They were also very 'hacky' in the way that they tried to use line
numbers. I personally feel that the fix for that is to use an o-sub.

The big question is, if it is done as a remap will it get distributed?

It would be great to work together with others on this.

-Todd

On 11/14/2016 09:01 AM, andy pugh wrote:
> On 14 November 2016 at 14:20, dragon <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I am working towards implementing lathe roughing cycles g71/g72. There
>> was some discussion in Wichita as to using remap or integrating this
>> into interp. I am trying to get a feel for what the devs would prefer.
> 
> Interesting, I was seriously considering doing this myself.
> 
> What I was thinking of doing was doing it Python first to check the
> logic, then converting to C++ to move it to interp_cycles.cc
> 
> What started me looking at it was that there is a moderately simple
> way to tell G71 where to find the code without considerably altering
> the way that LinuxCNC works with line numbers.
> 
> All you need to do is define the profile in a numbered O-sub block.
> 
> O100 SUB
> G0
> G1
> G2
> G3
> G1
> O100 ENDSUB
> 
> G71 P100 ....
> 
> This way the profile will be automatically skipped by the interpreter.
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to