Subject:
|
Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:56:32 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
steve <sjbaker1@airmail.+Spamless+net>
|
Viewed:
|
2368 times
|
| |
|
|
Allen Foster wrote:
> In fairness, although the NXT has a small amount of memory, you're
> talking about porting a high level interpreted language like Python to a
> low-cost embedded platform.
The size of the flash on the NXT is ridiculously small compared to
almost any other consumer-grade embedded systems. Look at cheap digital
cameras, PDA's, handheld game systems, thumb drives, MP3 players and
cell phones.
Name one of them with less than 4Mb of flash...you can't. You have to
work quite hard to find one with less than 64Mb of flash. The cost
argument doesn't fly. A 64Mb thumb drive costs $8 in quantity - and
there is a lot more to that than the flash memory chip. I doubt that
adding 64Mb of flash to the NXT would have increased the price by
more than one or two percent.
Yet the doors that would have been opened to AFOL's by having more
memory would have been substantial. Image processing, sound processing,
mapping. If we had more memory, you could have a Linux port to the
NXT and using bluetooth keyboard and mouse, you could use it like a
real computer - actually compiling programs on it and such.
All this for at most $5 added to the price...probably much less.
Aaargh!
> In my opinion you don't need to use python on embedded platforms.
I agree. It wasn't me that wanted to use Python - I was just
explaining what it would take to get it going - and it looks to
be impossible.
> Interpreted high-level languages are great for testing concepts and
> ideas on powerful platforms. They generally are inefficient with
> resource handling and quite slow. Once you refine your code, you trim it
> down and optimise it for the embedded platform, most likely in a
> language such as C with assembler for the special stuff.
Yep. I would program the NXT in C++ using a cross-compiler version of
GNU's g++ running on my Linux machine. Windows users can use the
exact same compiler running under the Cygwin platform. All of the
software is free, OpenSourced and quite mature (I've used the ARM
cross-compiler extensively during the work to port Linux onto the
Nintendo DS and Advance handhelds).
No doubt that's the right way to go.
However, that doesn't change the fact that I'm horrified at the small
amount of flash in the NXT.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) You've brought up the price point several times. If your analysis is correct (example: adding 64MB for a couple bucks), why don't you think LEGO did it? It would seem to me there are three options: 1) Your economic analysis is flawed. 2) LEGO (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
| | | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| (...) There could be other factors... Battery life (I have no idea what more flash would do to the battery life) Space/Size constraints (adding more memory may take up more room inside the NXT brick and/or require more PCB traces etc) Heat/power (...) (19 years ago, 14-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Mindstorms NXT programming languages
|
| In fairness, although the NXT has a small amount of memory, you're talking about porting a high level interpreted language like Python to a low-cost embedded platform. For my sins, my day job consists of developing code that must cross compile (...) (19 years ago, 13-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
52 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
|
|
|
|
