|
|
 | | Re: 3T
|
| (...) For the time being, I'm sticking with Mindscript. Steve gave me a couple of ideas on combining & re-using some code so I didn't have quite so many if statements to nest. I had already spend significant time writing Mindscript code, so I (...) (19 years ago, 12-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| (...) Maybe you could generate an image of the top-view, and overlay the zones... (...) Each builder would be allowed to build four plates high in the four stud neutral zone on their [right] side. Correct? (...) Yes. I wanted to post that. And, I (...) (19 years ago, 12-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| (...) Agreed on both points - thanks for doing the graphics, John. (...) What if two robots both want to make "permanent connections" to the same areas of the neutral space, and they go head-to-head? I'm not sure I see how anything other than a flat (...) (19 years ago, 12-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| (...) side, not in front/back. (...) Right. (...) Very cool. It sounds like you're ahead of the rest of us. Steve (19 years ago, 12-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
| | | | | Re: 3T
|
| This weekend we discussed adding the additional 4-studs of clearance to the side, the back, and/or both. Which is it? For my purely selfish reasons, I'd like no additional clearance requirements on the back (my side of the board) but the side would (...) (19 years ago, 12-Dec-05, to lugnet.org.us.laflrc)
|
|
