Subject:
|
Re: FLL not allowing NQC
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 7 Mar 2005 00:24:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3283 times
|
| |
|
|
John Barnes wrote:
> In lugnet.robotics, Stephen Johnson <diordna@macintoshdevelopers.net> wrote:
>
> > Do you guys mind if I send them an email with some of your post
> > snippets? I'm probably going to be assistant-coaching an FLL team next
> > year, and I've never used anything *but* NQC, and I don't know how to
> > get RoboLab.
First of all, all of the comments in this thread are visible for anyone
to peruse here:
http://news.lugnet.com/robotics/?n=23562&t=i&v=a
so while it's certainly polite (and arguably very correct) for you to
ask permission to quote people, you could have always simply refered
people you want to bring issues up with to this publically viewable url,
briefly noting which issues you want to highlight. That aside, I can't
imagine anyone on lugnet being seriously offended if they were quoted,
as long as they were quoted in the context of keeping with the intent of
the original quote
> Not at all as far as any of my comments go. I can't speak for the other posters
> on this subject of course. But I do think it is high time that FLL reviewed this
> particular rule.
>
> I have been asked a number of times if AFOLs would be interested in showing up
> with an AFOL solution to the previous year's FLL challenge at an event like
> BrickFest, and upon discussing this with other AFOL Mindstorms enthusiasts, find
> there's no interest in something like this if they can't use NQC.
>
> I think the addition of NQC to "the rules" would create a unification amongst
> diverse groups of Mindstorms users which is long overdue.
I do not believe it would be in Lego's best interest to allow tools like
NQC into the competition, for the reasons I stated previously in this
thread.
>> Mark
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: FLL not allowing NQC
|
| (...) Hi Mark. I understand where you're coming from, I assure you. I have an interesting question however. If a utility was created which converted NQC output byte codes to LASM or Lego RIS "code", which was then loaded as "the controlling" (...) (20 years ago, 7-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: FLL not allowing NQC
|
| (...) Not at all as far as any of my comments go. I can't speak for the other posters on this subject of course. But I do think it is high time that FLL reviewed this particular rule. I have been asked a number of times if AFOLs would be interested (...) (20 years ago, 6-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
114 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- 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
|
|
|
|
