Skip to content

Conversation

@jgilmore
Copy link
Contributor

It's written in the commit comment, but basically I noticed that if I ran two moves:
G1X10
G1X10
I could hear the steppers hesitate between the moves. This change removes that hesitation, at the price of a possibly much longer-running timer interrupt.

This is because next_move is now tail-recursive when there are zero step moves queued.

Also it's not yet perfect, see commit notes for my reflections on the timer status across moves.

This completely removes the PID logic, leaving only bang-bang control. This saves quite a bit of code space. Enough that I can add debugging even on a atmega168. Quite handy! And some people (nophead) don't need PID control.
This code will now compile correctly wether or not the MIN pins are defined.
@jgilmore
Copy link
Contributor Author

Defining "bang-bang" will allow debugging to be built for a 168 chip.
If we're not using endstops, we shouldn't require that they be defined.

@jgilmore
Copy link
Contributor Author

jgilmore commented Nov 1, 2010

This was closed? Did I do that by mistake or did somebody mean to close this pull request?

@triffid
Copy link
Owner

triffid commented Feb 6, 2011

hi, is this still relevant to the current codebase? Without my motors set up I can't tell

@jgilmore
Copy link
Contributor Author

jgilmore commented Feb 7, 2011

I don't know. With my laptop broken I can't tell :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants