 | | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) I agree it seems to be the wrong way round. That's the standard implementation. NDEBUG seems to stand for "No debug". One advantage of making it negative, is that you get the assert()s if you don't do anything (ie dont define NDEBUG). BTW, (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) D'oH! Thanks, Tim. I was very careful composing the original post, but added the example in as an after thought - Well spotted. Iain. (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | RE: NQC's future
|
|
(...) Ha Ha, very funny :-) Seriously, Philippe, why not give pbForth a try? I know that NQC works great on both the Spybots and the RCX, and even Cybermaster. But if you're looking for speed, higher precision, lots of variables and generally more (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC's future
|
|
(...) Something I'd like to see implemented in NQC is a mixed-mode multiply/divide, similar to the */ operator in Forth, with an intermediary 32bits product. That would greatly ease precision calculations without requiring major structural (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics)
|
| |
| | RE: IR Tower and Hyperthreading
|
|
<SNIP> (...) It should be illegal to use "Linux" and "straight forward" in the same sentence. Notice, everything after that line uses words like "scattered", "most helpful", "other flavors", "to be added to the kernel [in upcoming release]", and (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: nop in NQC?
|
|
(...) Doh! Now I really feel sheepish. Please forgive my public display of idiocy. John Hansen (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) <delurk> The first definition of assert is the correct, standard definition. However there is a slight boo boo in the original post in the line: assert (myptr = malloc (sizeof (mystruct)); Which will delete the malloc when NDEBUG is defined. (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | USB Tower range
|
|
Hi, I recently bought the RCX2.0 and I am a little disappointed at the range for the USB tower. Though configured to be at long range I doubt I can implement a range greater then 5 or 6 feet. Is this normal.? Am I missing something.? Paul Reedman (22 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: IR Tower and Hyperthreading
|
|
(...) Thanks a lot for the tips. I'm will definitely use the CVS version myself. Thanks again, Jean (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The end of an all-too-brief era
|
|
(...) line is alive and they have plans for it, and at that moment I felt satisfied. The day after my brother Giulio met Brad again along the corridors of the LEGOWORLD and asked him a few more questions. Shortly, Brad confirmed that Mindstorms has (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
