 | | RE: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
|
|
(...) Well what about an indexation based on a sensor value? How could your compiler know the range the sensor has? Sample: int volatile *color_sensor = (int *) 0x4000; int getColor(void) { static int color[4] = { 123, 456, 789, 111 }; return (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
|
|
(...) The point about C++ is that you can overload the array indexing mechanism and build a 'class' to implement arrays that does array bounds checking (or implements the "array" as a linked list or stores it on disk or whatever else you can (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
|
|
(...) You seem to be confusing "Java" with "Javascript", they are not at all the same thing. It's unfortunate that Javascript is named to suggest that it is somehow similar. Javascript in a browser (it can only execute within a browser) is (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
|
|
(...) No - absolutely not. I program with both and am fully aware of the differences. Java was ALSO designed to stay in the sand-box when initially started from there. (...) Java is faster where someone has already written suitable libraries. (...) (19 years ago, 17-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
