 | | Re: C$
|
| (...) Sure, it could be an advantage, but I'm going to outline all the stupid whining already: a) "But we already bought the interlocking ones!" b) "But we already own an interlocking one from my sister's son's best friend's toy collection!" We're (...) (21 years ago, 5-Oct-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: C$
|
| (...) Or like me get both. :-) Use which ever you like, I don't think either type should be required or restricted. Derek (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: C$
|
| (...) Isn't this question already answered in the posted "rules" (yes, it is) (...) I was able to build a device that could easily handle the interlocking chips. And, for the record, the chips I was using seem to be very "LEGO-friendly" sizes. With (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: C$
|
| (...) Booooring. So far, without actually writing any of the code, it seems that our robot's logic code would be something around 10 lines of NQC script. And still be able to beat other robots :) How's that for trash? (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| | | | | Re: C$
|
| (...) TOO SLOW!!!! DAN-OH. I've already posted C$ code that beats out anything posted so far!!! if i was not uesing a SLOW 8088 laptop, and a web interface to post I'd search for the link Chris (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
| |
