Dangling net names

I'm trying to understand the ideas behind the dangling net names in the config?

I'm thinking they could be intended for 'drop-in' hal files?

So, I installed the VistaCNC PS-2 pendant and got a long list of errors - had to comment out a lot of lines in the main hal file.

I'm trying to figure out if I should just comment out the unused nets or change the vista supplied files?

This isn't stopping things - I'm just trying to come up with some best practice policy so making changes down the road won't be a nightmare.

,.,.
An example of a dangling net name for someone following along:

A line from the generated hal file:
net coolant-mist <= iocontrol.0.coolant-mist

$ halcmd show sig |grep coolant-mist

bit FALSE coolant-mist
<== iocontrol.0.coolant-mist

I understand quite well how it works - net names that are not connected don't do anything. The question is about the best practice to keep things maintainable..

I use the philosophy that if you don't use it, delete it.

I mean why would you have a coolant signal on a router........ just saying...

It was so all configs would use the same names for common signals.
It was thought adding external HAL files would be easier/more transferable if the common signals needed used consistent signal names.
In fact some options in pncconf use these signals and it's less hassle to always have the signal present then to add them only if needed.

It's also more difficult to follow peoples HAL files if everyone uses a different name and a solution doesn't need to be adjusted for different signal names for the same function.

Chris

@cmorley
Thanks - what I was assuming - and it means I need to fix the VistaCnC hal files.