Subject:
|
Re: NQC on Scout
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 9 Nov 2000 05:10:45 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
MATTDM@MATTDM.spamcakeORG
|
Viewed:
|
646 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Baker <lego-robotics@crynwr.com> wrote:
> I don't think it's exactly the right size because it seems to contain
> ASCII strings for the names of functions and such - and it doesn't
> contain (presumably) the space taken up by your variables...but it's
> a good first step.
Variables don't take up space (unfortunately). They're purely register
variables.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
Boston University Linux ---> http://linux.bu.edu/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: NQC on Scout
|
| (...) That's good. Any less then 400 bytes would truly be daft. The system vars and pointers are already taken from the 1k of RAM. Dean -- Coin-Op's For Sale!: (URL) Lego Workshop: (URL) Lego Club: (URL) (24 years ago, 9-Nov-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: NQC on Scout
|
| (...) Well, if you run "nqc -Ofilename yourprogram.nqc", you'll save the compiled code to 'filename' - look at the length of that file. I don't think it's exactly the right size because it seems to contain ASCII strings for the names of functions (...) (24 years ago, 9-Nov-00, to lugnet.robotics)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
