HIYA RCaffin, I understand where you are going with the discussion. I was one of the ones that took that stand LONG ago with mach3.  When Art was programming Mach I think he had to set a limit as to what the original Base code (emc) would handle as far as nested levels. With Mach we have a repetetion limit of 999, most modern fanucs will do 9999 (;-) on subs.

Brian is aware of most of this as well. But with Brian as with Art it is basically a one man show to do the developement work. We actually burnt out Art we don't want to do the same to Brian.

In the game of DIY cnc patience and adaptabilty are the keys to happy machining. IF it won't/can't work this way TRY it from another angle untill you get want you need. AND it may not be the way you would want it to be.

Also you will find that Brian is a modern type CNCer his main thrust is CAMed code and the General USERS methods. And yes he understand it but is not crazy about the parametric code side (;-)  so we have to kinda tippy toe about the matter. Same with conditional code in the parametrics. Maybe one day we will have it but no time soon.

As with Mach3 it has evolved to an everything motion controller NOT just a CNC controller so they have to be carefull about what they may break when they go back in to do a fix. Many things have already been effected by fixes(;-). That is a reason for some to go back to OLD versions because they still will do certain functions that the later versions have trouble with.

ALso they have to make it WORK over a Very broad range of computer hardware. In modern CNC controllers the hardware is a fixed variable that never changes so you can program around any obstical you may have in hardware. NOT ALWAYS SO with PCs and the millions of variations of hardware over the years.
With the LPT version it is very easy to load up the VERY fast CPUs so bad that MACH3 will come to a crawl (;-)

 Take the driver for instance it is LOCKED in as a 32 bit driver and may never change. I believe Mach will evolve to only running motion controllers as outside hardware like everyone else has done.

So hopefully Mach3V4 will better suite the modern CNCer not just the hobbiest CNCer.

Just a thought, (;-) TP

Hi Ger and all

I think the issue has more to do with the 1 man development crew rather than what's theoretically possible. No offense to Brian's abilities, but he just doesn't have the time to develop Mach3 as it really needs to be developed.

I wonder how many people are involved in writing and maintaining the Fanuc code? All the different versions!
In other words, I agree with you completely here. That's the problem with proprietary code development as opposed to Open Source: resources.

I am not at all suggesting that Mach3 should be turned into Open Source, but should Brian want to get some help - I started programming in the 60s and have worked at all levels (hardware micro-code, Assembly, drivers, compilers, OSs, HLL, to DB SW) since then.

Ah well, back to chips.

Cheers

He posted today that he's hired a new programmer to work on the new version.

Experienced I HOPE!
Last time someone hired a new programmer to work on one of my systems (NOT someone of my choice) the project went backwards by at least one year. Sigh.

But, hope!

Cheers

Experienced I HOPE!

No worries there, the guy knows what he is doing and has already worked on bits and pieces for Mach
Hood

No worries there, the guy knows what he is doing and has already worked on bits and pieces for Mach

Them's good vibes!

Ok, so now we all heap on Brian for the next release date!  :-)  :-)

cheers

You being a programmer should know programmers watches and calenders dont seem to be on the same time scale as us mere mortals
Hood

You being a programmer should know programmers watches and calenders dont seem to be on the same time scale as us mere mortals

Ooh - below the belt! Unfair to ... huma... ahem.  :-)

Programmers would argue (and frequently do) that the problem lies not with their watches, but with the watches of management who create arbitrary deadlines. An old argument, which should not be restarted here.

Instead let us contemplate the light at the end of the tunnel ...
and wonder whether it is daylight or the headlight of an oncoming train...

Hey, I'm an optimist (with the odd skinned knuckle).

Cheers