Subject:
|
Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 11 Mar 2005 14:47:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3628 times
|
| |
|
|
On Fri, March 11, 2005 11:03 am, Steve Baker said:
> Jon Gilchrist wrote:
> > But they don't allow it, so you work around it. If
> > you really have strong programming skills, it should be a no-brainer
> > to work in RIS, or even Mindscript.
>
> That's just not true. My son's fluency in NQC is not going to translate
> to some braindead scheme of dragging little boxes around to make archaic
> flowcharts.
So, your son (sorry, I'm really not trying to attack your son) can create a sequence
of steps using NQC. As we know, these steps are converted to op-codes. Robolab
uses icons to represent the EXACT same op-codes.
But, your son doesn't have the ability to create the exact same sequence of steps
using icons as he created using NQC. That's not a problem with the software.
> Real programmers simply don't work like that. Real programs (even real
> Lego robotics programs) are hundreds of lines long - and translating those
> into an RIS flowchart results in largely incomprehensible spaghetti.
It takes hundreds of lines of code to make a robot move from this corner of the
table to that one? That's a shame, because I can do it with just a few icons.
Spanish. Now there's an incomprehensible language. Why? Because I don't know it.
> > After all, they're just tools,
> > aren't they? If NQC really doesn't give you a competitive advantage,
> > then why shouldn't you be able to work in RIS?
>
> I don't agree that NQC gives you no advantage. I think it's a huge
> advantage - and one that all children should be allowed to exercise because
> robotics is at least as much about software skills as it is about mechanical
> design skills and there is no reason to artificially limit one in favor of
> the other.
What advantage can you get from NQC? I agree, using NQC may make it easier to move
onto other non-LEGO projects, but in FLL, what advantage can you get? What can you
do with NQC that you can't do with Robolab?
> Absolutely. So why is my kid excluded just because he's chosen to
> learn a real programming language instead of a toy one?
That's like saying "Why is my kid excluded just because he's chosen to build real,
sheet-metal robots, instead of toy LEGO robots?"
Maybe, you'd suggest that the mechanical knowledge should be transferable. And, I'd
suggest the programming concepts should be transferable.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
| I'm really tired of arguing this. Nobody's minds are being changed. I still think it's a trivial rule change for FLL to fix this and it's long past time that they opened their minds to NQC and other similar systems based on Java or Forth. Other (...) (20 years ago, 11-Mar-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: FLL not allowing NQC; Mindscript is allowed
|
| (...) 1) As several people have pointed out, Lego *do* (somewhat indirectly) 'sell' NQC by providing it on CD-ROM in one of their books and as a CD sold via Pittsco-Dacta. 2) We can use Dell computers because Lego don't make computers. Why can't we (...) (20 years ago, 11-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
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
