shasse wrote: rodw-
Very interesting and useful example, thanks! I'll have to wrap my head around pncconf a bit more before I understand the feasibility of the change you propose (and of course defer to cmorely), but it certainly makes sense.
Scott
Pncconf uses the axes as the basis of almost everything, so making it be based on joints would be a _huge_ change.
Anyways I must say I don't see a big advantage. In general the axes should be known when you build a machine.
further more, while the signal names use the axis names it also uses a 2 for the second joint so x and x2.
So it's pretty easy to follow them in the code and rename them with an editor.
My assumption would be that if you drastically change the machine, you would rerun pncconf and go from there.
Personally I would really dislike using joint names for everything. When I look at the HAL code I want to first know what axis I am looking at then which motor (x or x2) on that axis.
But if someone wanted to code a more joint-centric pncconf I would consider their proposal.
Chris
