On 10 February 2012 21:13, craig cr...@facework.com wrote:
The number of such errors is highly
correlated to the number of key strokes. For the most part I find G-code
nicely concise.
Looked at another way, though, every wrong keystroke in G code
produces a valid command. There is an argument
In considering progrmming languages it is worth noting that there are a
fair number of people, like me, who are clerically challenged. 80% to
90% of my errors are typographical. The number of such errors is highly
correlated to the number of key strokes. For the most part I find G-code
nicely
All APT systems I have seen have a synonym table. CI can be the same as
CIRCLE, etc.
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:13 PM, craig cr...@facework.com wrote:
In considering progrmming languages it is worth noting that there are a
fair number of people, like me, who are clerically challenged. 80% to
On 08.02.12 07:21, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
Again - shamelessly
My interest is having a full free APT system on Linux. Inclusion in
LinuxCNC would cause development - voila - APT on Linux. :)
OK, I have some catching up to do. Is Apt on linux highly desirable
because there is no other free
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Erik Christiansen
dva...@internode.on.netwrote:
On 08.02.12 07:21, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
Again - shamelessly
My interest is having a full free APT system on Linux. Inclusion in
LinuxCNC would cause development - voila - APT on Linux. :)
OK, I have some
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:33:13 -0600
Stuart Stevenson stus...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Erik Christiansen
dva...@internode.on.netwrote:
On 08.02.12 07:21, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
Again - shamelessly
My interest is having a full free APT system on Linux.
XP and 7
I don't think they will sell anything else. They only support the other
systems for people who cannot move to windows. They imply the other systems
are not as developed.
On Feb 9, 2012 10:39 AM, dave dengv...@charter.net wrote:
On Thu, 9 Feb 2012 08:33:13 -0600
Stuart Stevenson
Re apt360, the maintaner is lurking on irc most of the time so can be contacted.
The channel on freenode where cam gets discussed is #cam and he is
there (crotchet)
I did download it and had a play, the source is interesting
Dave Caroline
Thanks for the heads up. That textual CAM package is very interesting,
even though it neither documents our LinuxCNC dialect nor provides a
more human readable variant of same. We could change our goal to gcode
generation, but that would mean abandoning current goals.
The cam-zone blog has
I see a problem with using gcode generating software languages to
machine complex geometries. In my world all gcode generating software
languages will undercut or gouge the material deemed to be the desired
material to include in the desired part. This happens at random times.
Usually only
On 8 February 2012 05:37, Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net wrote:
But is the following much more readable than raw gcode?
INDIRV/0,1,0 $$ direction the tool initially moves
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APT_(programming_language)
Has an example. I think it is a little clearer
On 08.02.12 11:00, andy pugh wrote:
On 8 February 2012 05:37, Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net wrote:
But is the following much more readable than raw gcode?
INDIRV/0,1,0 $$ direction the tool initially moves
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APT_(programming_language)
Has
On 8 February 2012 12:51, Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net wrote:
Have you had a chance to glance over what the experimental parser does
with your idea for grouping all Spindle commands into a conceptual and
syntactical group, outlined in this morning's post, a little upthread?
Not
2012/2/8 Anders Wallin anders.e.e.wal...@gmail.com:
I see a problem with using gcode generating software languages to
machine complex geometries.
So, another conclusion from this discussion would be Do Cutsim instead !?
Joseph Coffland seems to have
independently made great progress at
On 8 February 2012 14:02, Viesturs Lācis viesturs.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Erik proposed this line:
Arc CW X0 Y1 Centre X1 Y0.5 Feedrate 25
Is centre x1 y0,5 are incremental distance from current point or
absolute coordinates of center point?
I think that it means absolute X and Y, and that an
2012/2/8 andy pugh bodge...@gmail.com:
On 8 February 2012 14:02, Viesturs Lācis viesturs.la...@gmail.com wrote:
Erik proposed this line:
Arc CW X0 Y1 Centre X1 Y0.5 Feedrate 25
Is centre x1 y0,5 are incremental distance from current point or
absolute coordinates of center point?
I think
On 08.02.12 14:02, Viesturs Lācis wrote:
Thirdly, I tend to agree with Steve Blackmore, who posted in another
thread that g-code is basically a standard in cnc world with lots of
minor variations, but the essence is the same.
IMHO drifting away from it would considerably decrease appeal of
2012/2/8 Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net:
Experiments with new grammars are only to see if there are benefits to
_some_ users in having a more explicit input syntax, which is then
converted to gcode.
Thank You for clarification!
I am all right now :)
Viesturs
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Viesturs Lācis viesturs.la...@gmail.comwrote:
2012/2/8 Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net:
Experiments with new grammars are only to see if there are benefits to
_some_ users in having a more explicit input syntax, which is then
converted to gcode.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Viesturs Lācis viesturs.la...@gmail.comwrote:
2012/2/8 Anders Wallin anders.e.e.wal...@gmail.com:
I see a problem with using gcode generating software languages to
machine complex geometries.
So, another conclusion from this discussion would be Do Cutsim
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Viesturs LÄcis
viesturs.la...@gmail.comwrote:
2012/2/8 Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net:
Experiments with new grammars are only to see if there are benefits to
_some_ users in having a more explicit input syntax, which is then
converted to
Swp, Stuart,
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 11:02 AM, spad...@sover.net wrote:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Viesturs LÄ cis
viesturs.la...@gmail.comwrote:
2012/2/8 Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net:
Experiments with new grammars are only to see if there are benefits to
_some_ users
On Wednesday, February 08, 2012 12:54:10 PM spad...@sover.net did opine:
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Viesturs Lؤپcis
viesturs.la...@gmail.comwrote:
2012/2/8 Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net:
Experiments with new grammars are only to see if there are benefits
to _some_
Stuart Stevenson wrote:
Gentlemen,
I see a problem with using gcode generating software languages to
machine complex geometries. In my world all gcode generating software
languages will undercut or gouge the material deemed to be the desired
material to include in the desired part.
Well,
Stuart Stevenson wrote:
I would be willing/able to contribute to the process in some manner. I
don't care so much about the 'free' description, I want APT on linux.
If it has already been translated from FORTRAN to C, and is text-based
(as opposed
to graphical) then it should be easy to run
Hi Steve,
Yes, I have seen that page. A couple years ago I had everything set up
and working just like the page shows. I even programmed a ruled surface I
created to try a 5 axis swarf cut. As it remember it the post was not 5
axis complete yet. The development was progressing slowly and then it
On 08/02/2012 11:57, andy pugh wrote:
Not really, I am living in a hotel in the Arctic at the
moment, and have no access to Linux.
What's up Andy - not cold enough for you at home?? It
certainly is here!!
Ian
--
On Tue, 7 Feb 2012 23:44:57 -0600, you wrote:
I see a problem with using gcode generating software languages to
machine complex geometries. In my world all gcode generating software
languages will undercut or gouge the material deemed to be the desired
material to include in the desired part.
On 07.02.12 07:11, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
APT does this and has since the 1960s.
Thanks for the heads up. That textual CAM package is very interesting,
even though it neither documents our LinuxCNC dialect nor provides a
more human readable variant of same. We could change our goal to gcode
My comment was dual purpose.
To encourage you to use the APT language and syntax when you develop the
language for running LinuxCNC.
Using the APT language would encourage capable people to take Apt360 and
develop it further.
Yes - I can be a shameless promoter :)
Stuart
On Feb 7, 2012 6:46 PM,
On 07.02.12 19:17, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
My comment was dual purpose.
To encourage you to use the APT language and syntax when you develop the
language for running LinuxCNC.
I'll have to look for some APT language doco then. Maybe it does provide
sufficient gcode equivalents for
Well, maybe I ought to chime in. Hardly anyone writes
machine code anymore, higher level languages have so many
benefits, and the performance to be gained is now minimal.
So, maybe we should think of G-code in the same manner.
This is about the way I use it. I haven't written any G-code
in
Gentlemen,
I see a problem with using gcode generating software languages to
machine complex geometries. In my world all gcode generating software
languages will undercut or gouge the material deemed to be the desired
material to include in the desired part. This happens at random times.
Usually
On Wed, 8 Feb 2012 11:43:48 +1100
Erik Christiansen dva...@internode.on.net wrote:
On 07.02.12 07:11, Stuart Stevenson wrote:
APT does this and has since the 1960s.
Thanks for the heads up. That textual CAM package is very
interesting, even though it neither documents our LinuxCNC dialect
34 matches
Mail list logo
