On 5/23/2012 5:53 AM, andy pugh wrote: > Unfortunately the > G-code standard is not very standard. Every information-representation standard I ever met was encumbered with exceptions, variants, special cases. After all, they're written by committees (on some of which I served, so I'm guilty too).
It's bad enough when the lifespan of the standard is less than the lifespan of the committee members. Standards that live over generations of committee members often end up looking like the proverbial camel (a horse designed by a committee). Even if the committee members try to write and maintain a "clean" standard, all committees reach consensus by being vague, and vagueness represents an opportunity for invention among implementers. It's the nature of every vendor to want to stretch a standard to fit the specific features of its product. Regards, Kent PS- It's the nature of every sales rep to swear the product conforms to whatever standard will close the deal, but that's another story. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
