Subject:
|
Re: lego-robotics / question for the experienced...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:26:25 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
[tmassey@]avoidspam[obscorp.com]
|
Viewed:
|
730 times
|
| |
|
|
Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net> wrote on 09/14/2003 01:53:12 AM:
> > as i eagerly await shipment of my
> > kit, i'd like to pick your brains for some tips. should i jump • straight
> > into NQC (my programming background is little to none) or should i play
> > with the lego programming environment at first?
>
> Hmmm - hard call.
>
> I think the best advice I have is for you to try your best with NQC
> - and if it
> 'clicks' then all well and good. If you are getting NOWHERE after
> a few evenings
> of struggling, then back off and play with the Lego environment for
> a while - come
> back to NQC later.
Interesting. I would have given the exact opposite advice! :)
I would spend some time with the kit exactly as Lego intended. The
environment that they give you for "programming" is a graphical screen
where you drag blocks of "code" into place. It's certainly not like
programming in C or Java; but it's not supposed to be. Rather, it's
designed to make your program look and feel like a flowchart. It focuses
on programming on a more conceptual level.
This is a *good* thing. It gets you comfortable with the process, if not
the actual procedure. You won't have to fight to find bugs due to tiny
typos, have to figure out why this piece of code won't compile, etc. All
you'll have to figure out is why your robots isn't executing your plan like
you thought it would. That's different: it's a higher, more conceptual
level.
As you progress, you will want to customize the big blocks of code Lego
gives you. You can do that, and the results begin to look and feel like
normal programming, but again without the possibility of "grammatical"
typo's, etc. Finally, once you've mastered the conceptual issues, you will
be ready to move on. When you start saying, "Boy, I wish I had more
control over *this*", you're probably ready to move on.
I think the example of your son illustrates this well. It's possible that
programming of any kind (including connecting RCX blocks) may have pushed
him away. However, my five year old daughter enjoys moving robots around
our living room floor by connecting blocks together. She enjoys trying to
make the robot navigate pst obstacles, etc: figuring out a plan of action
and conveying that plan to the robot. To me, that's programming. Using
the normal LEGO software certainly removes much of the angst of
programming...
Tim Massey
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: lego-robotics / question for the experienced...
|
| I'd have to agree with Tim. I first started using the Lego software. Through it I learned the basics of programming. I then moved to NQC after I started getting into situations where the Lego software was too restricting for me. There's a couple (...) (21 years ago, 14-Sep-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: lego-robotics / question for the experienced...
|
| (...) I think quite a few people bought it for that reason. (...) Hmmm - hard call. NQC is "real" computer programming - the language you are using is "Not Quite" the language that a vast percentage of modern software is written in. If you master (...) (21 years ago, 14-Sep-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
6 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
|
|
|
|
