On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:01 AM, dave <dengvall@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
BP post-processor
auxfun
clearp
cycle
end
fedrat
fini
leader
lprint
machin
mode
origin
partno
pprint
rapid
retrct
rotabl
seqno
spindl
stop
tmark
tool
toolno
trans
Nothing too wild.
I assume some of you have looked at the -1999 ansi cl-neutral part of the
std which is far more rich in vocabulary.
Is there anything wrong with moving toward that as required rather than
trying to conform to the iso spec?
Here I'm assuming post- processor vocabulary gets added on the front end (
phase I) and simply get passed thru to
phase IV which has the rules to deal with it.
Of course there is a real difference between the binary output of phase III
and the ascii output that the standard is
moving toward. Not sure I care as long as I don't have to troubleshoot it.
;-)
Clearly in troubleshooting/diagnositics the ascii output will be easier.
Brent and other may have strong feelings.
Of course, we really won't know much until we get the NASA code and can
determine how rich or un-rich vis a vis APT IV it is. Lots to
speculate about but not much concrete knowledge.
Dave
While fixing the vocabulary page I researched MAXDPM and found
https://cours.etsmtl.ca/sys856/Documents/Notes%20de%20cours/H11/
see post180.pdf a manual for CAM-POST a post-processor generator
theres another project an open source version
Dave Caroline
