That's a valid concern.
It is one of these functionalities that are so "primal" that we don't think much about them anymore, i.e. quite out of place, now that bar for adequate safety is much higher than back in the beginnings.
Because these functions with motion are virtually everywhere,
this needs some thinking... I have an idea, though.
_Mark
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenPnP" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to openpnp+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openpnp/5def69f6-d3ae-44ea-a62a-99790ccbc424n%40googlegroups.com.
This PR makes this safer. In doing so, it distinguishes two types of motion:
The machine homing safety checks are centrally administered inside the motion planner, so motion generated from all sources is covered.
The behavior can be overridden on the driver, in case it proves too restrictive, e.g. for controllers where absolute linear encoders are available and homing is simply not required, or where homing is inherently and safely done when powering up. This option can be controlled per driver, i.e. it can be treated differently if multiple drivers/controllers with different capabilities are involved. The drivers assigned to axes determine which drivers are relevant for a certain motion.