Hi Dave . I never asked to anybody on the board this issue. I honestly don't know how to do it . I opened the thread on this specific argument to discuss, understand , feel the opinion of the user on it. Never in my mind to see a so strong reaction from a part of the people I read . I'm not a software guru or LCNC expert so I'm not able to do the patch by myself. Can you kindly explain me how to express an official request to the LCNC board of developers. To convince them to examine my request is not easy for me. First of all I'm not so confortable with the english writing to express my self fully . I tried during the thread to explain why the GOTO (or whatever function/instruction can do the same thing) can be useful to produce clear and well structured G code but maybe I failed . If I will have the opportunity to perorate this request in any way possible I will do it. If a feature is transversal between different CNC manufacturers to be a sort of "standard" why LCNC shudn't have it ?
Regards Alex On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Dave Cole <linuxcncro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > If you really want this feature, then you need to either write the code > and submit a patch or convince someone else to do the same. > > Chris is on the board, and I don't see him waving a flag for the > implementation of the GOTO. > > I can see where an unconditional GOTO could be useful for quickly > hacking Gcode, but the conditional code implementation looks > questionable in value since there > are already conditional constructs in the existing Gcode that work fine. > > Dave > > > On 10/4/2014 7:04 AM, alex chiosso wrote: > > Hi to all. > > I'm the beginner of the original mail thread "Unconditional , Conditional > > Program Jumps " . > > Honestly the discussion is diverted from the initial point . > > I'm talking about G code programming nothing else. > > So what is conventional, best practises , dogma of whatever else in all > of > > the other programing languages is less important. > > For sure , as it was pointed out , the majority (if not all) of the > branded > > manufacturers of CNC controllers implement > > the GOTO statements inside their G code instruction sets. > > I do believe that if this is true (and it is) the meaning is because it > is > > needed and/or useful . > > For my personal experience the absence of this kind of instructions is a > > missed opportunity of empowering and give more flexibility to the > > conditional/unconditional programming . > > I don't know how much difficult is to implement it into the LCNC G code > > interpreter, so I only can make a wish hoping that the LCNC board of > > developers will implement this feature . > > If it's not possible I can only be sorry about that. > > When you have a toolbox as much tools available you have as much freedom > > you get. > > After that anyone can use whatever tool wants to do the job. > > The GOTO statement it's not breaking any "fisical law" to be rejected. > > In particular for some of the applications I would make , without GOTOs > is > > simply not possible/not convenient to use LCNC due to the exaggerated > > complication > > of the G code program writing. > > As Chris Radek wrote : > > > > If someone wants to, and it gets done in a sane way (I think the > >> 0xxx LABEL ... 0xxx GOTO would be most consistent with the way our O > >> words work), let's, as they say, thoughtfully consider the patch. > > > > can be a good starting point. > > > > Regards > > > > Alex > > > > On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:32 AM, craig <cr...@facework.com> wrote: > > > >> The 200 branch go to: > >> > >> Many years ago,/in the days of punch cards and mainframes,/ I wrote, /in > >> FORTRAN/ a complex radar system modeling/simulation tool to evaluate > >> radar system designs in a variety of environments. The program used a > >> large variety of signal generation and signal processing modules to > >> predict how designs and design changes would change performance.. The > >> program generated simulated radar returns from simple and complex > >> targets (things we might want to see), clutter (the things in the > >> environment we didn't want to see) and jamming (signals the enemy might > >> generate to make things difficult) for radar configurations, and > >> dynamics. (What comes out of radar antennas is dependent on the > >> relative dynamics of anything that might be reflecting radar energy as > >> well as antenna design and pointing. ) > >> > >> There were modules to generate the various radar returns for various > >> conditions and designs. There were also modules to model the various > >> signal processing elements in radar receivers, etc. > >> > >> The program flow was controlled by an integer array telling it what to > >> do next after if finished each step using a 200 branch go to statement. > >> It required a good understanding of radar systems and signal processing > >> to run this program. It was used to aid the design of a number of > >> radar and sonar systems. > >> > >> Thirty years after I left that company somebody told me they just found > >> a bug in the program. They were still using it. > >> > >> Craig > >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer > >> Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports > >> Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper > >> Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer > >> > >> > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Emc-users mailing list > >> Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer > > Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports > > Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper > > Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer > > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > > _______________________________________________ > > Emc-users mailing list > > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > > --- > This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus > protection is active. > http://www.avast.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer > Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports > Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper > Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer > > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Emc-users mailing list > Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
