Messages

1

VB and the development of wizards / Re: P, Q, R parameter

« on: May 03, 2010, 07:53:24 PM »

Note: V4 is suppose to have that fixed(nestingmacros)

There's a V4?  I'm stuck with Tormach's current release, need a workaround.

2

VB and the development of wizards / Re: P, Q, R parameter

« on: May 03, 2010, 07:46:49 PM »

Is there some directive statement that we can give the interpreter that would be equivalent to "#include" in C?  I'm thinking we could avoid nesting altogether by writing the entire macro in a Sub.  The main sub would just be a wrapper, so that you could call it as M## in gcode, but when you wanted to use it in another macro you would #include the relevant file and call it directly, instead of using the code function (which, when you think about it, is a rather roundabout way of calling VB code from within VB code - why should I have to ask the vb interpreter to ask the gcode interpreter to ask the vb interpreter to run a macro ).

But if it were that easy, somebody woulda thought of it already... right?

3

VB and the development of wizards / Re: P, Q, R parameter

« on: May 03, 2010, 12:50:37 PM »

From the thread linked to in reply #12:

In Mach there is only room for One macro to run at a time, (NOTE: macro pump is compiled).

Seemed to imply that compiled macros can be nested.  Can I compile my macros?  How?

4

VB and the development of wizards / Re: P, Q, R parameter

« on: May 03, 2010, 11:55:58 AM »

Thanks Overloaded, it's gratifying to see some evidence that I'm not getting early onset alzheimer's.  Now if I could just find my keys...   

5

VB and the development of wizards / Re: P, Q, R parameter

« on: May 02, 2010, 11:16:56 PM »

Is that also why we can't nest macro calls?

What happens?

Hrm, can't find it anymore, thought I'd read it wasn't allowed. Brain fart?

6

VB and the development of wizards / Re: P, Q, R parameter

« on: April 27, 2010, 12:31:25 PM »

Is that also why we can't nest macro calls?  It sure is tough to develop a general purpose macro library without nesting...

7

VB and the development of wizards / Re: P, Q, R parameter

« on: April 22, 2010, 07:02:03 PM »

I was playing around a little more with this today, and the cascading effect I thought I had seen yesterday is gone.  The more I think about it, the more I think that I made it up by happenstance.  Plus I was really tired.  But the persistence is still there.

Whereas Param1() and Param2() always return -1 if P and Q, respectively, are left out of the macro call,  Param3() will return whatever value was last used with R.  It's even persistant between different macros.

8

General Mach Discussion / Re: g02/g03 reversed with g18?

« on: April 22, 2010, 06:30:43 PM »

Got it.  When I'm standing where the operator normally stands, I'm looking at the XZ plane from the negative end of the Y axis, unlike the XY plane, which I look down upon from the positive end of the Z axis.  Likewise, if I arbitrarily stepped around to the left end of the table (X-) to look at the YZ plane (G19) it would also seem counter-intuitive, but if I were to step around the right side of the table (X+), it would behave more like I expect.

Good lesson.  Thanks.

9

VB and the development of wizards / P, Q, R parameter

« on: April 22, 2010, 10:16:45 AM »

The value passed to Q seems to "cascade" down to R, and then persists if R is not specified in successive calls.  Feature? Known issue? Already fixed?

10

General Mach Discussion / g02/g03 reversed with g18?

« on: April 22, 2010, 02:34:24 AM »

Title pretty much says it.  As an example, I would expect this code:

G91 G18
G02 X-2 I-1

to begin movement in the -Z direction, bottom out at Z-1, X-1, and then start moving in the +Z direction finishing at Z0, X-2. In other words, clockwise circular interpolation. To get that behaviour I have to instead use G03.  In G17 mode this isn't a problem - G02 is clockwise, G03 is counter-clockwise, as expected.

I'm using Version R3.042.029 (the current Tormach distro)

It's not really a big deal to work around, but I rather dislike having to be cognizant of it all the time - I'm using it a lot right now for the work I'm doing.