On 6 February 2012 04:35, Erik Christiansen <dva...@internode.on.net> wrote: > Granted, if I had them ingrained in my brain, after decades of use, I > would not change either. There is no reason to. An optional input filter > only provides flexibility to anyone wanting more. The filter I'm playing > with will offer decluttered old syntax, and a more human readable form. > Should it be completed, its use is discretionary.
I think that any existing and working file with the .ngc extension has to carry on working, but if folk want to smarten up the interpreter to work without <> tags and O-numbers in the control structures, that seems fair. However I see no reason why we shouldn't consider starting from scratch with a new machine-control language, possibly based on Python syntax. I would prefer to see that translated directly into motion commands in LinuxCNC rather than into any sort of G-code, though. However, fun though that might be, I doubt it would reach completion, or gain any sort of market acceptance outside a very small subset of LinuxCNC users, and almost certainly wouldn't expand outside our project. -- atp The idea that there is no such thing as objective truth is, quite simply, wrong. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try before you buy = See our experts in action! 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-dev2 _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
