Subject:
|
Re: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 4 Nov 1998 22:03:50 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Kekoa Proudfoot <kekoa@Graphics.Stanford.EDU>
|
Viewed:
|
2739 times
|
| |
|
|
> I can see how "Building" and "Programming" are activities, but I don't
> think "Hardware" or "Internals" are.
Maybe "activities" was the wrong word.
> And I think a separate "Internals"
> section belongs under each CPU section, not together in their own section,
> unless there's a lot of common data among them (maybe there is for RCX and
> Cybermaster.)
I envisioned Internals to be like an appendix. Nobody really want's to
know about them except those people working at the lowest level, which is
almost nobody. And maybe Internals also wasn't the right word. The ideas
I was trying to convey was "internal software architecture."
> Or maybe we've spent too much time on this already. Since it will
> probably be written in HTML, people can search and jump around easily and
> the overall structure is not that important.
Structure is definitely important. But if you're referring to
cross-references, those are useful too.
-Kekoa
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | RE: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
| I can see how "Building" and "Programming" are activities, but I don't think "Hardware" or "Internals" are. And I think a separate "Internals" section belongs under each CPU section, not together in their own section, unless there's a lot of common (...) (26 years ago, 5-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
