what if Macros appeared in Console?

r123

It seems strange to me that there's no mention of any of the activity generated by Macros in the Console. None whatsoever.

How about if there were lines in the console like

"13/04/2021, 20:42:43 Macro: reset probe"

or

"13/04/2021, 20:42:43 Macro:Dock and Wipe"

??

oliof

@r123 Macros are usually called via direct interaction, what would you use the logging information for?

For those Macros I need output from, I use M117 or M118, which allows even more granular messaging than just that a Macro was started. So if you need a message on your particular system whenever a Macro is called, you could just start with one of these.

o_lampe

@r123
what @oliof said.
Also keep in mind, that a message sent by M117 pops up only once per session, while echo "message text" is sent everytime the macro runs

oliof

@o_lampe in my experience, the echos only get output after the macro finishes, while the M117 is shown immediately.

r123

@oliof I reckon logging directly run macros is so that you can look back and see that you did (or did not) run bed levelling before that 5 hour print. For example.

When we type Gcodes directly they land in the console, so why not macro filenames?

Look forward to experimenting with M117, M118 - and "echo" @o_lampe ! - this weekend.

Thanks.

Phaedrux

Not a bad idea. Moved to the wishlist.

o_lampe

@phaedrux said in what if Macros appeared in Console?:

Not a bad idea. Moved to the wishlist.

While we are talking about wishlist in macro-context:
I tested a few things in macros and from time to time I made syntax errors or typos in variable names.
A vague warning popped up in the console about these errors, not naming the macro they happened in.
Was it t#free.g, t#pre.g or t#post.g?
Happy searching...