Re: Reply to Ben Ocko re: pseudomotors

[Mark Rivers <RIVERS@cars3.uchicago.edu>]

Gerry,

> I would hope the monochromator support that Tim Mooney
> wrote would also be able to have a pseudomotor interface
> for the energy.  

I don't think that should be a problem.

> He also wrote rather involved optical table support.  

That is the table record I referred to earlier.  It works well for the
geometries it supports, but it only supports a restricted number 
of table geometries.

> Likewise, wouldn't the
> undulator gap be another candidate for a standard
> pseudomotor layer?  

Yes, it would.  Things like this could might even be able to be done with a
simple database where the fields in the pseudomotor record are just linked to
fields in other records.  It's hard to tell if this will work until one tries
it.

Mark