On 1 February 2012 14:36, Erik Christiansen <dva...@internode.on.net> wrote:
> because having a documented grammar in the parser would only allow > run-time _extending_the_rs274ngc_interpreter_by_remapping_codes. It > would only permit remapping of standard gcodes by changing the grammar. > But the need to remap gcodes half way through a swarf-making job, > without allowing a compile, is probably a rare requirement. I think there might be some confusion here, between LinuxCNC "compile time" and "run time" and G-code "compile time" and "run time" Currently LinuxCNC G-code grammar can be changed at LinuxCNC run-time. I don't think there are any plans yet to re-define the G-code from inside G-code. but then you couild probably extend G-code to include commands for extending G-code. In principle a User M-code could do it. -- atp The idea that there is no such thing as objective truth is, quite simply, wrong. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users