Subject:
|
Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 3 May 1999 21:31:00 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Joel Shafer <joel@connect.^antispam^net>
|
Viewed:
|
927 times
|
| |
|
|
At 09:11 PM 5/3/99 +0000, you wrote:
> Ralph Hempel wrote:
> [snip]
> > pbFORTH IS a bytecode compiler. You throw source code at it through the • IR port
> > and the RCX "interprets" it into efficient bytecode that is later • executed. You
> > can interact directly via the keyboard, query variables, dump memory, • etc. Once
> > the pbFORTH firmware is loaded, you can test and refine code as needed. • You can
> > use ANY pc that will run NQC - Win95/98, Linux, Mac. The execution speed is
> > closer to raw C than NQC interpreted bytecodes.
>
> This brings up a point... why make the RCX interpret the source code into
> efficient
> bytecode? Instead, why not compile the code on your own machine to
> bytecode and
> download the bytecode directly? Certainly that would be a more compact
> and efficient
> solution on the RCX end of things, and would provide for the potential to
> enhance the
> user interface of the compiler end of things with, say, a gui front end, a
> source code
> editor with syntax highlighting, etc.
>
> [snip]
> > > Mark
I agree, that would make pbForth much more appealing if the source could be
compiled on a pc in a nice gui environment and then the bytecode loaded
into the rcx.
Not only could someone enhance the gui front end as Mark has suggested, but
someone could also get the specs for your bytecode and easily write an
alternate language compiler. This would make your system actually a new
firmware replacement that could be language independent.
p.s. I'm going to go ahead and learn Forth and give pbForth a try so that I
will actually know what I'm talking about!
Joel Shafer joel@connect.net
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | RE: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) Once you get around the idea that the RCX does the compiling which makes it platform independent, you will see the light... (...) This is a good plan. You have my full support :-) Cheers, Ralph Hempel - P.Eng ---...--- Check out pbFORTH for (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | RE: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) If we are going to the trouble of new bytecode, then we need a new compiler. If we design a new compiler, then what language will it be? Yes, we could use C as the base and compile to pcode which is essentially what NQC does if I'm not (...) (25 years ago, 3-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
67 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
|
|
|
|
