Subject:
|
Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 9 Mar 2005 00:19:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2614 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> NQC bears a stronger resemblance to contemporary programming languages
> than Lego's development tools do, and a person who is already familiar
> with programming in any real computer programming language will probably
> be more productive with NQC than with Lego's tools. This would
> translate to what would be perceived by others as a competitive
> advantage in using NQC, even though the actual advantage is that the
> person is simply a better computer programmer, and would therefore
> reflect poorly on Lego's offering of tools.
The flaw in this sort of logic is the assumption that more productive
programming leads to a more likely to win FLL robot. This is definitely not
true. The far more likely scenario is this: experienced robot designer leads to
more likely to win FLL robot.
The mechanical design behind a winning FLL robot FAR outweighs the programming
logic required to win. But there aren't any rules in FLL saying you can't get
advice from a mechanical engineer (or, as John points out, there are no rules
saying you can't use gear-train design tools). You just can't use a non-LEGO
programming environment.
This rule is utter and complete nonsense (imho). The FLL folks could easily
change the rule to allow any programming tool that targets the standard LEGO
firmware. Teams that choose to use NQC would just be using a different means
for producing the exact same byte code instructions produced by RIS or Robolab
(or ScriptEd with MindScript or LASM).
John Hansen
http://bricxcc.sourceforge.net/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
| (...) Right, but you're liable to see a lot of crossover between the two groups (programmers and robot designers). A person who is interested in one has a similar enough mindset to those interested in the other subject that you can expect that a lot (...) (20 years ago, 9-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: RIS 2.0 Problems
|
| NQC bears a stronger resemblance to contemporary programming languages than Lego's development tools do, and a person who is already familiar with programming in any real computer programming language will probably be more productive with NQC than (...) (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
|
|
|
|
