 | | Re: Programming the RCX...
|
|
(...) Connecting data paths between conventionally programmed chunks is not the same thing as "programming". (...) Yeah - *theoretically* - but in practice, people don't do that. (...) But it's still not a visual programming language...it doesn't (...) (24 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Programming the RCX...
|
|
(...) I have to disagree. I personally have three fairly significant robotic applications in the field which were developed using a visual programming language. I must confess that the language was not purely visual. The software IC components were (...) (24 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Programming the RCX...
|
|
(...) Ah - OK. (...) I think that might just be overkill for a system as simple as the RCX. There are only three motor outputs - and you have no direct control over speed or angles - you can only say "forwards", "reverse", "brake" or "freewheel" (...) (24 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Programming the RCX...
|
|
Steve, Thanks for the reply. I was thinking more along the lines of abstraction and simplification versus a pure visual language. Something that would make programming an RCX alot easier with respect to range checking for valid values, such as motor (...) (24 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Programming the RCX...
|
|
(...) There certainly is some kind of a Java implementation for RCX. I havn't used it though...most people start off with NQC (Not Quite C) which is a very good starting point...then if you need more, dump the RCX firmware and replace it with (...) (24 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
