triffid/Teacup_Firmware — comment on commit 9dbfa7217e0de8b140846ab480d6b4a7fc9b6791
File:  line 0
By phord:

I think the soft endstops will be easier to implement in the dda, but that may be misguided. I like the direction this work is going. I also agree the axes should be changed to an array. So then you will have, for example, target.position[X_AXIS], soft_min[X_AXIS], soft_max[X_AXIS], steps_per_m[X_AXIS]. With a union{...}, you could even efficiently set up an alias so that &target.X = &target.position[X_AXIS]. But I would hope that almost all of the references to X, Y, Z and E would vanish anyway. Even the gcode_parser could have axis_code[X_AXIS]='X'.

This presumes I also get the other thing I wanted to do, that is, to replace um_to_steps_x() with um_to_steps(steps, um, steps_per_m[X_AXIS]). But this requires careful planning and testing since it replaces the overflow avoidance macros.

More later...