Re: Bearing path command

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Paul LeBeau <> wrote:
> It occurs to me that there is a side-effect to bearing that may be
> undesirable.
> At present you can append two independent paths safely and know that each
> subpath will remain the same.  However that won't be the case with bearing
> as it is defined now.
> In order for a user or a program to safely append two paths, a "B 0" will
> now need to be inserted between them.  If the user is trying to stick to
> relative commands, then the first path will have to be analysed to determine
> the bearing in effect at the end of the path and a counter-acting bearing
> inserted.

"Sticking to relative commands" makes sense for the ones that are
relative to a position, but extending that policy to doing only
relative bearing doesn't make sense.  If you want your subpath to
start at a null bearing, just use "B0".


Received on Thursday, 13 February 2014 20:24:28 UTC