No-code in manufacturing: automation without programming

Post by craftinator » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 9:04 PM UTC

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #40

speedybird wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say G-Code is Assembly-like, you just mean superficially right? I would expect G-Code to be interpreted, not assembled.

Saying that it's like assembly is an odd way of phrasing it since a single G code statement can have a huge amount of functionality under the hood. But yes, it's interpreted. In fact, some older machines have very small buffers so you have to "drip feed" them a few lines of G-code at a time.

Post by Fordec » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 9:14 PM UTC

helltone wrote: post #7

Is no-code the new trend because full automation with AI failed? I wonder if we're trying to realise what jobs actually require skilled labour.

Post by HeyLaughingBoy » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 9:31 PM UTC

craftinator wrote: post #41

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that it's like assembly is an odd way of phrasing it since a single G code statement can have a huge amount of functionality under the hood. But yes, it's interpreted. In fact, some older machines have very small buffers so you have to "drip feed" them a few lines of G-code at a time.

I work with gcode on a day to day basis. I understand what the parent poster means about it being "assembly like", in that many of the common patterns of handwriting assembly language are employed when hand writing gcode. It has GOTO statements, lots of analogs for push and pop like behavior, and in some cases you are manipulating raw bits to deal with user input. It is interpreted into machine code as well, as is as…

Post by perl4ever » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 9:40 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #37

jkhdigital wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So there's really two problems that are being conflated in the phrase "no code": 1. We need a richer library of standardized DSLs for various real-world environments, where the power of a full PL is perhaps too dangerous without excessive training. 2. The method of specifying algorithms in plain text (i.e. "code") is not intuitive or unapproachable for large numbers of people who could otherwise benefit greatly from…

My line of thinking on this is “what makes Excel have the combination of simplicity to start and ability/power to scale to fairly complicated workbooks and how to bring that to other fields, including manufacturing?” We could do a lot worse than excel in a lot of areas I think.

Post by mcguire » Thu, Oct 07, 2021, 9:45 PM UTC

bob1029 wrote: post #18

all2 wrote: post #6

> So, what is no-code? No-code development is perfect for engineers who have zero programming knowledge. It’s based on a visual drag-and-drop user interface, with no hand coding required to reach the end goal. It empowers workers to design solutions they need to overcome the challenges they face every day—without writing a single line of code. In 2019, 84% of enterprises across the US, UK, Canada and Australia had al…

> The problem with no/low code is it mirrors a DSL for whatever problem being solved. This is the entire advantage too. If you read this like a hard constraint, your new job is to simply make sure you develop a high-quality model of the problem domain. The rest could be put on the business owners, especially if you can teach them a little bit of SQL (the world's most popular DSL).