Subject:
|
Re: Why java is (not) bad for Mindstorms
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:11:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1702 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Mr S <szinn_the1@yahoo.com> wrote:
> -- pisymbol <pisymbol@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [SNIP}
> > Maybe this is all crazy, I'm not sure, but it seems
> > with Bluetooth, passing
> > along the logic via messages to a more powerful host
> > makes a lot of sense to
> > me... (provided the messages are easy to consume and
> > produce, obviously trying
> > to parse XML on the tiny NXT may be a bad idea).
> >
> > -aps
>
>
> If I'm chosen as the one of the 100, this is what I
> will work on, using and abusing the BT communications
> on the NXT.
I think this would be a nice project and prove very useful.
> I don't think that a smart I/O interface requires the
> NXT to run Java or anything more than what it natively
> has. The programming language is as much a convenience
> for the programmer as it is a tool to get the tightest
> byte-code possible.
I'm not really advocating Java or any language. Personally, I think Java is in
appropriate for low-level programming and one is probably best off with C/asm.
However, in this model, the host can be more flexible in its runtime environment
and I could see Java as a definite possibility.
> By the way, with limited resources on the NXT or other
> uC, *WHY* would anyone want to pass XML messaging? In
> a closed system where only I will be looking at the
> code, there is a lot I can do with 256 message types,
> an address field(s), some data, and a CRC. Who needs
> human readable tags? If we are talking about 45 people
> working on a massive datawarehousing project with 12+
> applications involved, sure XML makes sense. The NXT
> is not likely to be involved in such a project.
You read way too much into my last post. I wasn't actually advocating XML
though having the NXT make a web service like substance to the host sounds kinda
cool to me (not sure if its any useful, I'm just wildly shouting things).
> I guess I just don't see the advantages of putting
> bloat-ware on a resource limited system. Embedded
> systems should never have to suffer the burdens of
> translating XML, unless that system is made
> specifically for that. I'm pretty certain that Cisco
> routers and switches don't use Java...
Yeah, most routers run some UNIX like substance (written mainly in C).
> Sorry for the long post...
No problem. I actually now wish the 1/3 of the people who are going to
write/implement software/hardware additions in the MDP program are choosen from
this board! I've read about so many good ideas and it would be nice to see the
folks in here be able to get started ASAP! :-)!
-aps
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Why java is (not) bad for Mindstorms
|
| -- pisymbol <pisymbol@gmail.com> wrote: [SNIP} (...) If I'm chosen as the one of the 100, this is what I will work on, using and abusing the BT communications on the NXT. Right now, I'm working at using the RCX Ir-I2C mindsensors.com interface for (...) (18 years ago, 24-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
