Category: General LinuxCNC Questions
Hi Lcvette,
It's indeed a alternative controller, once it finished.
This can take a long time. Some are good coding day's, some are bad coding day's without good progress.
It turned out, modifying lcnc's code to do thing's i would see accomplished is almost impossible.
Best reason is entanglement.
Then just writing new code from scratch is 10x faster to get things done.
There are no goals for me. It's just a project to try out new things wich got my interest's.
It's not the purpose to outsmart lcnc or something like that. Or claiming thing are better etc.
Altrough it is interesting to find out differences in lcnc and this approach.
Like this has bi-directional hal pins and used modern boost interprocess for shared memory.
Today did a mayor bug fix. It turn's out that multiple shared memory regions updated by thread's, would not exchange data
properly. Even when mutex etc. was set.
In the end it worked by using a single shared memory region for all thread's.
Sounds very exciting! like an overhaul of linuxcnc without the constraints of outdated sections. very cool indeed!
I have a question regarding the current Trajectory planner and since you have been in it elbow deep i was wondering if i could bounce it off you to see if it may be feasible for those of use who are experiencing some pretty bad effects of it. I don't want to hijack this thread and was wondering if we might chat in realtime? this is the QtPyVCP chat room link below please feel free to drop in, you can ping me with @Lcvette in the room and I will get a notification!
matrix.to/#/#qtpyvcp:matrix.org
Thanks Grotius, I hope to chat soon!
Chris
