[hirundo]

It's a bunch of Visual Basic behind an Excel spreadsheet, that helps you generate gcode directly, rather than via CAD/slicers. That gives a level of control that is awful and wonderful. There are a bunch of youtube short videos with demonstrations.

I'm interested in printing small parts containers very fast ... just open topped boxes ... and am looking forward to trying this with big nozzles.

[bo0tzz]

> It's a bunch of Visual Basic behind an Excel spreadsheet

While true for the original FullControl, I've understood they are currently working on a new version in Python, and presumably that is what was used to generate the gcode that's on the website right now.

[remram]

So does it allow you to do things that slicers wouldn't do? Or use tricks that slicers wouldn't use? Like inline assembly is used in programming?

I am confused about how this helps with printing those parts shown on the website.

[mdorazio]

Yes and no. Several of these could probably be done with a proper model and "vase mode" in a normal slicer. However, others are simply not possible in a normal slicer because slicers limit you to planar layers and moves. So for example the pin-support challenge cannot be done in a slicer because they would try to slice the pillar into many individual layers with retractions and moves instead of continuously extruding while increasing the z-height as this gcode does. Similarly, the non-planar spacer wouldn't work in a normal slicer either because it's non-planar by design.

[OJFord]

> not possible in a normal slicer because slicers limit you to planar layers and moves

That might change, I saw this about 'conical slicing' recently:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1i-1TEdByZY

[ilyt]

We need 3D slicers, surely someone tried to make AI for that already ?

[IshKebab]

That sounds horrific.