On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 22:46, David Bagby <[email protected]> wrote: > An example which comes to mind is a slitting saw being used in a > > vertical mill. There is one physical tool for this scenario, but two > different TLO values may typically be in use. One value typically > corresponds to the top edge of the saw blade, the other to the bottom > edge of the blade.
Well, this is a valid sample for having different varsets for tools. I use slittings saws too, but I'm used to fix the measured tool length so that the length is the center of the blades. > The current situation where an individual user (or shop) can make the > decision to alter G43 default semantics (by turning on the INI value) is > OK. That's up to the shop owner and they can make that choice for > themselves and their existing investments in gcode. > > It's a different situation when LCNC makes such a change to expected, > default semantics. Doing so is effectively making the decision for all > existing LCNC users who ever upgrade to the new LCNC version (or > later). Since this would be an incompatible semantic change to M6 (as > it's M6 that would magically apply a G43 action which is not in the > gcode program), I consider this to be an undesirable change. I agree completely! Thank you Dave for the detailed post! Reinhard _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
