Re^3: What should I call a gear cutting module now called cog.pm?

but there are many slightly different varients.

Is there any way to define the variant for which your module produces code? Or, does it use a subset that will it work across all variants? The reason I ask is that it might be a good idea to include that in your module name if it is doable.

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

Comment on Re^3: What should I call a gear cutting module now called cog.pm?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: What should I call a gear cutting module now called cog.pm? by MARKWIN (Novice) on Oct 30, 2005 at 19:56 UTC
I believe that my module uses a very minimal subset. Unfortunately, I dont have hardware to prove this.	[reply]
Re^5: What should I call a gear cutting module now called cog.pm? by sauoq (Abbot) on Oct 30, 2005 at 20:17 UTC
I should mention that I know nothing about this problem domain other than what I just read in that wikipedia article... I'd say the one issue you should consider is that someone might have a need for the exact functionality your module provides, only with a slightly different g-code output. Given that, you might consider structuring your code to allow for changing the output target. That way, if someone comes along and finds that your output doesn't work on his machine, he could just add a new output target. Of course, I don't have a clue about how difficult that would be given your current code. If you can do that, then a somewhat generic name like one of the ones that Corion suggested would make a lot of sense. If you take another route, it might make sense to be more specific with your name. (I.e. call it GCode::Generator::Fanuc::Gears or something.) That would leave room for someone to come along later and write a generic GCode::Generator module that handles the output target and could use your module and other modules like Gcode::Generator::BCL::Gears when someone writes them. -sauoq "My two cents aren't worth a dime.";	[reply]