On 8/11/2012 8:49 PM, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 3:13 AM, Dave<e...@dc9.tzo.com> wrote: > > >> I think we are comparing apples and oranges here. If you want to do a >> plug in for Mach3, you need a Microsoft C compiler, that will allow you >> to alter the homing routine for Mach3 via an external program or control. >> But you really don't want to do your own plug in, unless you are >> familiar with Microsoft C, are a developer, and have a lot of patience >> as the plug in docs are not very good. >> I'm pretty sure that you can't alter the homing routine in Mach3 via VB. >> >> If you want to do macros with LinuxCNC you can do all kinds of things >> with Python (which is interpreted), make custom M codes etc. Python in >> LinuxCNC is somewhat comparable to the VB type code used in Mach3, but >> much more powerful. >> >> Mach3 V4 will use Lua now instead of VB for scripting... or so I have >> been told. So you will need to strap on the "technical doc" feedbag to >> learn Lua anyway. BTW, Lua is similar to Python. ;-) >> >> LinuxCNC and the Hal layer can do things (by a user) that Mach3 cannot >> do. The Hal layer is routinely altered by users and does not require >> the developer tools. >> >> A motion PID loop is a good example as is virtually all of the standard >> hal components that us LinuxCNC users take for granted. >> >> LinuxCNC is complicated because it can do a lot of things. If you want >> simple but limited, stick with Mach3. It works fine for a lot of >> people apparently. Ron said 50,000 recently. That is a lot. >> >> No one seems to have a clue how many LinuxCNC users are out there. >> >> If you think you can alter LinuxCNC to make it simpler, they are always >> looking for developers willing to make contributions. >> >> Dave >> > Oh, you've seen Mach3 mentioned and decided I was advocating for LinuxCNC > to become one? NO. > I was advocating extending HAL to include real-time scripting, like Lua in > orocos.org toolchain. > Please, don't jump into middle of discussion, it's silly. > > Alex. > > >
>You probably have it all installed on_your_ > machine anyway, so you don't notice, but for average hobby-cnc > builder, when he decides between say Mach3 and LinuxCNC and whatever > else, LinuxCNC becomes just too complex. Alex, I'm trying to follow you, but I don't understand your goal. (And I went back and read several of your messages.) Why do you think that adding a scripting language like Lua to the hal layer would be desirable? Hal is pretty simple in it's implementation. I doubt that adding a scripting language to hal is going to help hobbyists. And I suspect that Lua would be too slow for the Hal layer. Have you tried Comp? It works very well if you want to create your own real time component. C is a pretty simple language compared to just about anything else. Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
