Re: IMO

[Paul <paul-at-bdiemc.fslife.co.uk>]

Hi Ray

Slowly catching up on all the emails... I'm all for forking the CVS sources 
to support HAL. Whilst we are at it, I also favor a complete overhaul of the 
code from the ground up to fix many of the perceived problems. e.g. The 
multitude of #ifdefs, assorted cryptic /* fix me */ comments, convoluted 
function calls, etc, etc. Reducing the amount of redundant or duplicated data 
stored in the emcmot struct and using common variable names across the 
realtime/user space would be another recommendation.
I would also favor adherence to the FHS standards as per 
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/fhs/ or
http://www.redhat.com/mirrors/LDP/LDP/fhs/fhs6.pdf.

Regards, Paul.


On Thursday 08 May 2003 4:08 pm, Ray Henry wrote:
> 2 - Fork the sourceforge CVS to allow for HAL

> I believe that the move to abstraction layers will produce a much stronger,
> more flexible EMC.  I also believe that, for a while with this effort, near
> chaos will be our primary product.  I am really excited about the changes
> that we will make but before we have finished it we will have rethought
> everything that we do now.

-- 

"To err is human...to really f*** things up requires the root password."
>From a collection of quotes at http://www.indigo.org/quotes.html