above i used usb code, and had the img link go to a url,i just put the picture up on our website and used that url. actually though i just recently figured out what was wrong with that tool. i had one arc connecting the top and bottom, so i had to break the arc in the middle, and now it verifies fine... wird... thanks for your reply though.

thanks for your reply. i think thats what im trying to do. i did that for some of our other tools, and it worked well, but with this tool when we go to verify it, instead of looking skinnier in the middle, it is fatter. this is how it looks in verify: however, this is how it is should look: it seems as though it is taking the other side of the tool and using that in verify...

we're back with yet another tool, but it is even simpler this time then the one we got to work before. this tool is very simple, but for some reason when we verify in mastercam, it seems to take the other side of the tool to create it. it looks ok in back plot, just in verify does it look wrong. the tool by itself basically looks something like this: thanks in advance.

no no, were not that out of it here. sorry, i guess i forgot to mention that the post had already been set to convert our tool paths to metric, but when he did this he forgot to convert the feeds and speeds. we had just gotten it and were in the process of testing when he left, and realized we needed that as well.

thanks for your replies. the only thing we wanted them to convert was our feed speeds, and the other reason i dont think it was an unreasonable request, is that they were still supposed to be setting up our post, when the guy we were working with left. thanks again.

hey, how is everyone. we are having some problems communicating with our mastercam dealers, and are not sure if it is us, them, or both. we had some problems in the past, they were resolved for the most part, and then our main post guy left, and had told us to email the general email adress for posts with any more problems we were having. we did so about 6 weeks ago, and just got a response today. to us, that seems like a very long turn around time, we needed the response to get our machine working. fortunatly it was not too much of a problem, we were able to fix it oursleves eventually, but it is more the point. the problem we were having was with our feed speeds, they needed to be in metric, but we were used to doing everything in english and did not want to put metric feed speeds into mastercam, we wanted the post to automatically change them. we asked the general posts email adress to please "put a converter for feed speeds [in the post] from english to metric" to us this seemed like a very clear cut question, but when we finally got the response he asked us to be more specific and what conversion factor to use. i am not sure how much more specific we could be here though...

ahhh... so that would explain it. thanks a lot. i will look and see if i can find any that will compile with plain old borland c++... thanks again.

yea, im not sure why i need PATH_MAX either. im just trying to learn this stuff, so what i was doing was trying to compile the sample file shapes.cpp, and that is giving me all of these errors. i downloaded the latest compiler, thanks a lot, i think i like it better... i am actually getting some new errors now... (it is never ending, sorry) for some reason i dont have the stdafx header file. i dont even know what this one is for, although that doesnt say much... the other new errors i get are with the stdlib header file, it says "templates and overloaded operators cannot ahve C linkage. any ideas? thanks for all your help.

thanks bulliness. i put that in, still got the error, so i opened up my limits header file, and path_max doesnt exist in it. do you know what it should be set to? thanks.

no, i hadn't been. i tried it, by typing extern #include "headerfile" but it said the #key was invalid, so i took it out, and it still didnt like it. i am probably using it wrong... thanks.

borland c++ version 3.1

i tried including limits.h, but it still gave me the same error... it occurs in about 9 different places, twice in m_lvars.h, and the rest in m_avars.h

#include what? i have included: m_vars.h, m_ncvars.h, m_menu.h, m_io.h, m_dbm.h, m_init.h what am i missing? thanks

james- there was 1 tiny little overlapping entity at the bottom of the tool. arrrrgh!!! thanks for all your help. -emily

never mind, i found that file, sorry. but now i am getting 3 other errors. the first two are from the m_vars.h file, and they say: "redefinition of 'FALSE' is not identical", and i get the same error for true. the third error i get is from the m_lvars.h file, and it says: "undefined symbol in 'PATH_MAX'" is there anyway i can fix these errors? thanks again.