are there any quite simple objective premises that form a basis for evaluating statements?
--- On Wed, 11/9/11, andy pugh <bodge...@gmail.com> wrote: From: andy pugh <bodge...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Emc-users] problem with genserkins To: "Francesca Sca" <fancy_...@yahoo.it>, "Enhanced Machine Controller (EMC)" <emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net> Date: Wednesday, November 9, 2011, 3:00 AM On 9 November 2011 09:44, Francesca Sca <fancy_...@yahoo.it> wrote: > I don't find the parameter genserkin.max-iterations in Hal Config. It should be under "parameters" is that where you looked? > If I put this line "setp ganserkin.max-iterations 100" in hal file, Emc2 > gives an error because It isn't found this pin. I am assuming you spelt it correctly? It has to be exactly "genserkins.max-iterations" I don't know for a fact that the pin is created, but the code to create it is in the kinematics file. -- atp The idea that there is no such thing as objective truth is, quite simply, wrong. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RSA(R) Conference 2012 Save $700 by Nov 18 Register now http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev1 _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
