 | | Re: Why java is (not) bad for Mindstorms
|
|
(...) Mammals don't even come like that. LOL! (...) Kev (20 years ago, 23-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why java is (not) bad for Mindstorms
|
|
(...) I'd like my NXT to be self aware, straight out of the box. Am I asking too much? :-) Steve (20 years ago, 23-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why java is (not) bad for Mindstorms
|
|
(...) I don't know the format of the output of the graphical programming environment. The concept of a JIT compiler seems good to me. Dunno where it should exist. on the NXT or on the PC? (...) Could be. (...) I sure hope so. (...) Kev (20 years ago, 23-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why java is (not) bad for Mindstorms
|
|
(...) Because different people want mutually contradictory things. For my own usage, there are times when I want a very procedural language where I can easily specify the precise sequence that things happen in at incredibly fine level of detail (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why java is (not) bad for Mindstorms
|
|
(...) What is the output of the NXT graphical programming environment? I mean the NXT could already have a JIT type execution environment already whereby the graphical IDE generates pseudo-code ("bytecode") and the firmware on the NXT does the (...) (20 years ago, 23-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
