or2 example correct ? need to flip on VFD with coolant requests

loadrt or2 2, or2.in0 , or2.1.in1
addf or2

net coolant-pump-vfd


# --- COOLANT-FLOOD ---
net coolant-flood  =>  or2.1.in0
# ---- Coolant-Mist ----
net coolant-mist  =>  or2.1.in1


or2.1.in0 bit in    coolant-flood
or2.1.in1 bit in    coolant-flood
or2.1.out bit out    coolant-pump-vfd

#

---

Coolant Pump

---

net coolant-pump-vfd   <= or2.1.our bit out =>     hm2_5i25.0.7i77.0.0.output-07

does this look right ? documentation is a bit light on the addf call


 

addf     or2.in0     servo-thread
addf     or2.in1     servo-thread

I attached the preliminary hal file, but to my eyes it looks correct now, lmk if I missed something. I am however trying to figure out the best way to call additional coolant dialogs from Gcode. there's a lot more than just flood and mist in coolant options these day. 

I'm asking because your documentation is clear as mud.
. it's unbearably bad, I'm not saying this to be a dick, but it's absolutely awful. your man pages are circular word salads. I'm assuming several reasons,

1. written by programmers
2. a lot of non native English speakers

it's bad when i have a professional automation engineer going wtf, and he works for a very big company, and he's highly skilled.

so yes, I'm asking for feedback, because I'm trying to learn. i need to turn on 1 output with 2 inputs, and per the man pages this is the least convoluted path.


if my interpretation of the man page is incorrect, explain why, in plain English, stop writing hal commands, you're obfuscating the problem
. BTW I'm happy to help rewrite the man pages as i can.

The issue causing people to write replys in hal is you have written questions in hal.
So how about a paragraph or 2 writing about what you want to achieve. Mist and coolant are already supported pretty well...
Its never a good idea to fight the paradigm
Keep perservering with hal. On day it will just click. I spent hours reading the man pages for components (after clicking on expand man pages) when I got going.

There is also the mux2 component (and other muxes) that could still use the coolant pin but select different coolant methods based on the select state.

 

My need, is to turn on the coolant pump, alongside of the solenoids to direct flow. I have a single coolant pump and 2 flow circuits. or2 appears to be the correct path for this. I can also add more or2 inputs as I add more gcode coolant flow options.

so when I call for mist I need my pump to turn on, when I call for flood, I need my pump to turn on. if I call for both, I need the coolant pump to turn on. pretty simple really. I need to add the through tool in place of the mist at some point, but I have more reading to do that. there are many places in the operation of this lathe, where I need to call turn on 1 output for multiple inputs. I have been using machine enable for most of the common must be on options for operation. 

from my reading, mux looks like a bit more complexity than I need. I want to keep the function of the machine as stone simple as possible. I can add more complexity as I learn. 

That does sound right. I know Andy has given his idea. Here is how I would do it.
A lot of the examples have 2 pins on the one line. I have found its much easier (particularly in the beginning) to only have one pin per lline. eg
first create your signal from the pin you want
Then send it where you want toThis makes it much easier to send the signal to another pin without a jumble of pins on one line....

thanks Rod, finally got a chance to read this today. that's where I was heading with my configuration idea. and now there's a little thread about or2 other people can search and use !. I agree with the jumble of pins on a line thing. Also commenting, I am adding loads of commenting to my config files now.