Documentation might need updating?

More
27 Aug 2023 01:28 #279049 by Vector
I know this is from left-field, but I'm just picking up the manual on ngc and got confused in a way people who know it will not remember.

(As an aside, I find it super cool that LinuxCNC was a NIST project that now lives on its own. Super cool.)

The documentation for ngc programming appears to be here at:  linuxcnc.org/docs/html/gcode/overview.html#_format_of_a_line

Specifically, that link points to section 2: Format of a Line.

Trying to read ngc syntax for the first time, I'm particularly focused on this section.

(And by the way, this document is clearly ported and slightly updated from a NIST document from August 2000 found here .)

Line 3 under "Format of a Line" is what does the heavy lifting... but it is curiously missing "o-words"

A learning newb finds example ngc code, like say m6demo.ngc, and right up, it starts doing "o<m6demo> sub" and the newb goes to section 2, Format of a Line, line 3, then goes to the "words" table, and hey, hang on -- "o" (aka "O") isn't there. 

It doesn't show up until we get to section 3.2: Subroutine Parameters, where we only have the following line of text: "1-30 Subroutine local parameters of call arguments. These parameters are local to the subroutine. Volatile. See also the chapter on O-Codes . "

It seems pretty clear to me that o-codes were an extension added after 2000 (along with named parameters and axis UVW, and reading .ini and .hal parameters and other such goodness) but that the documentation above those add-ins was not updated...

This leaves your hard-reading sequential-newb-learner with unnecessary struggles.

If I were to make a pull request for updating this doc, would it be acceptable to make naming-convention recommendation for little "o" instead of capital "O" so that it's immediately clear when someone might copy a line by hand not to get that mixed up? (I raise my hand on that one.)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
27 Aug 2023 01:53 #279053 by tommylight

(As an aside, I find it super cool that LinuxCNC was a NIST project that now lives on its own. Super cool.)

I would like to take this opportunity to thank NIST for that grand gesture!
Thank you to everyone at NIST, then and now.
:)
Until a while back i even had the BDI ISO (Brain Dead Install, that was the name it was christened with), kept it for nearly 15 years, never used it as i got just when the Ubuntu 8.04 was released with LinuxCNC.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Vector

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.138 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum