Re: Re: RESOLVED: EMC is poorly designed and implemented.

["Pete Cook" <kf2qd-at-terraworld.net>]

An interresting thought - I read somewhere in the past that Charles Moore -
the creator of FORTH - suggested that after someone had written and debugged
and patched and corrected and ... their code they should throw it all away
and start over now that they had figured out how to get the job done and
thus do it cleaner and more efficiently - I have seen several projects that
have or could stand to have this done.

Pete Cook

> There is a lot of work that could be done to bring the code into line with
> current uses.  Several folk have had interesting discussions about changes
> that could/should be made to the code.  I remember one conversation
recently
> in the halls of NIST while walking between the shop and the ISD offices.
> Someone suggested that maybe we should scrap much of the code and start
> again!   I was probably the most surprised of the bunch.
>
> I don't believe that any of it is sacred.  What might be close to sacred
are
> the variety of things that we currently do with it and have planned for it
in
> the near future.  Then there are those dream/wish additions that each one
of
> us have.
>
> Thanks for this thread.  As Fred continues to say, we need a committee to
> establish directions for the code.
>
> Ray
>
>
> On Thursday 31 January 2002 09:52 am, Keith R wrote:
> <s>
> > 2. EMC consists of GUI (Tcl/tk),  EMC (mot,NML,task, rcs_impl) and the
> > Real-time Control System. EMC was written to demo the RCS, I believe.
(My
> > short synopsis - RCS providing control framework language, EMC doing an
> > implementation of a machine control app.) The GUI by Ray H. written to
> > improve the X-windows interface. (which it did, thanks, Ray!)
>
>
>