I found it and corrected it.
I must have thought at the time that you could call a named file in 2.2.x as
well as trunk.
John
On 23 Nov 2008 at 20:21, Jeff Epler wrote:
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 09:30:25PM +, Mike Merrett wrote:
oA_routine1 sub
In the next bugfix release, this will
On Sunday 23 November 2008 22:49:13 Jeff Epler wrote:
As far as I can tell, named subroutines aren't in 2.2.x. (they're in
the development version, and your test program works there)
However, I'm not sure why you don't get an error at the first line with
o. That should be fixed to give a
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 05:57:39AM -0600, John Thornton wrote:
I found it and corrected it.
Thanks John.
This correction should already be in the online version of the docs, and
will be in the next bugfix update as well.
Jeff
Hi:
Is there any reason this should not work? (in emc2.2.7)
oA_routine1 sub
g0 x0y0 z50
g0 x10 y10 z40
g0 x0 y0 z50
oA_routine1 endsub
ob_routine2 sub
g0 x0y0 z50
g0 x5 y5 z40
g0 x0 y0 z50
ob_routine2 endsub
oA_routine1 call
ob_routine2 call
oA_routine1 call
it
As far as I can tell, named subroutines aren't in 2.2.x. (they're in
the development version, and your test program works there)
However, I'm not sure why you don't get an error at the first line with
o. That should be fixed to give a clear error message instead.
Jeff
I believe that Jeff is correct. My recollection is that the reason for
the screwed up number in the error message is that the number is a
pointer to the string containing the named o-word.
In the process of incremental implementation, work was done on the code
before some of the error
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 09:30:25PM +, Mike Merrett wrote:
oA_routine1 sub
In the next bugfix release, this will now give the improved error
Bad number format
when the first line with o is encountered.
Can you indicate where you saw the named o-words mentioned so that I
can make sure it
