Subject:
|
Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:24:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3304 times
|
| |
|
|
snipping somewhat freely...
In lugnet.robotics, John Hansen wrote:
> ... any language that targets the standard LEGO firmware on an RCX brick can
> not result in any competitive advantage
> [FLL objectives] require mechanical
> ability and the programming aspects of these tasks are generally a much smaller
> part of the puzzle.
Given these two statements, why are argue so much about whether or not teams can
use NQC? Being able to use NQC won't make any difference to the resultant
program, being able to use NQC won't make any difference to the ability of the
robot to accomplish the given tasks. So why get hung up on it?
--
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
| (...) Because any language that targets the standard LEGO firmware on an RCX brick can not result in any competitive advantage while the other examples you cite clearly would lead to an unlevel playing field. LEGO already provides a language choice (...) (20 years ago, 10-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
|
|
|
|
