I put myself in the speech hoping to bring a useful opinion and to be too much ... I'm very new and my coding is very simple ... for first never try to use machinekit but I read all docs. I appreciate a lot comunication across thread and multicore approach i think is very interesting. Of course not for simple mill machine 3 axis ... but actually the world of motion is much more interested to unconventional robot for example than milling machine ... so start 2 or more Lcnc/machinekit istance on the same I5/I7 platform is a very appreciate things ... plus the modern industrial bus needs isolcpu triks so isolate the various rt istance on the various core is better than assemble a machine with 3/4 rt-pc. I think these "advantages" of makinekit vs. Lcnc is not so secondary.
Aphart from that I think NML is a very simple and roboust way to do the things ...it is a real pity that nobody has thought something similar in a modern way. regards bkt Il giorno ven 14 set 2018 alle ore 20:14 Chris Morley < chrisinnana...@hotmail.com> ha scritto: > Mick > > I hope you don't mind I pushed this back to the list. > > I too was hoping to make inroads for modularity, future proofing, and > lowering the bar for future developers. > > I'm not an expert of course but the multi core approach did seem to make > sense for the future. > > It was also conveniently already done and already modular. > > If we had made our HAL similarly modular then one could conceivably used > either library. > > I also thought that by using a HAL library maintained by someone else, the > small amount of active developers > > could concentrate on other things, while still expanding the utility of > HAL. > > > It seems, at least on the linuxcnc side there is little interest in the > work/idea of using MK's HAL. > > There are multiple reasons that i draw this conclusion, but it doesn't > really matter. > > > I do appreciate, everyone's participation in the discussion. > > I feel it's good to stop and ask these kinds of questions from time to > time. > > Chris M > > ________________________________ > From: schoone...@gmail.com <schoone...@gmail.com> > Sent: September 14, 2018 5:19 PM > To: EMC developers; Chris Morley > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Breakout of HAL/ machinekits's HAL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For some reason this did not go and has not hit the list > > > Chris > > I have no interest in evangelising Machinekit, it is there, if people > don't like it > or are in other ways resistant, I'm not bothered. > > I was merely outlining a possibility. The big issue regards the CNC stack > IMHO is not > whether we need joints/axes, but getting rid of NML and making the whole > CNC stack more modular. > > NML was written by C programmers operating on single core machines with > linear programs, > who never expected anything else to exist. > It is littered with global variables, structures and many other things > that make any > sort of OOP impossible as it stands. > > The assumptions are similar to those in components we changed in > Machinekit, where for example, > data exchange between threads was reliant upon an assumed model of > preemption giving > priority to one thread and it being allowed to complete before the other > one began. > Michael showed that they fell apart when exposed to cached multi-cored > processors > and started producing some very strange results. > > If you want any help, contact me, but you know your own code base better > than me. > > Machinekit is GPL2 AFAIK, ie. there is no binary stipulation. > > The problem with GPL2+ as I see it, is it allows later bad versions to > supercede it, at the > users arbitration of what version is most advantageous to them. > (Linus certainly seems to think GPL3 is bad) > > Good luck > > Mick > > > From: Chris Morley <chrisinnana...@hotmail.com><mailto: > chrisinnana...@hotmail.com> > To: EMC developers <emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net><mailto: > emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net> > Subject: Re: [Emc-developers] Breakout of HAL/ machinekits's HAL > Message-ID: > < > by2pr05mb224801f1ed450b05292c91e2c0...@by2pr05mb2248.namprd05.prod.outlook.com > ><mailto: > by2pr05mb224801f1ed450b05292c91e2c0...@by2pr05mb2248.namprd05.prod.outlook.com > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > We are getting off topic here.... > I was suggesting we separate our HAL and cnc stack with the idea of > possibly using MK HAL. > > NML is part of the cnc stack. > That would be future work, I'd someone wanted to tackle it. > > Though just the act of splitting hal from CNC without adopting anything > would make future work easier. > > Chris M > > Can you tell us about license of MK HAL work. > > AFAIK Linuxcnc is GPL2 for some and GPL2+ for most(?) > > > > _______________________________________________ > Emc-developers mailing list > Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers > _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
