Subject:
|
Re: What I would do (2)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 18:45:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1825 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Ed Manlove wrote:
> It sounds like they have listened well are the NXT Software
> will provide more control and flexibility then the RCX software. So, Tim, I
> would add one more language to your toolset, that being the NXT Software.
<snippage>
> But for those who used these tools
> because the Lego RCX tools were lacking, I think, will have a real different
> experience this time!]
Ed, can you point me to the sort of things you have read which make you believe
the NXT software and its underlying firmware will provide the sort of control
and flexibility which such things as NQC and alternate firmwares provided for
the RCX?
The main thing that I have read which makes me very worried about the NXT
software is that it is being written by National Instruments using LabView. And
you all know my opinion about writing complex software applications using a 4GL
language like LabView.
John Hansen
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: What I would do (2)
|
| (...) Very good point! So one design goal/guiding principle would be try not to break brickOS programs for NXT and provide if nessecary a easy software upgrade path. (...) I would really like to point out (to the general audience) what I see as a (...) (18 years ago, 27-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
