Subject:
|
Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 3 May 1999 23:28:49 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
John A. Tamplin <jat@liveonthenet.com%NoMoreSpam%>
|
Viewed:
|
1416 times
|
| |
|
|
On Mon, 3 May 1999, Kekoa Proudfoot wrote:
> Encoding is an implementation detail. Can we talk about features?
That was my point, that it was not a benefit for having an interpreted
"machine language" over using native machine language. The only benefits
are portability and error checking, and the error checking is problematic
when you get to that low a level.
John A. Tamplin Traveller Information Services
jat@LiveOnTheNet.COM 2104 West Ferry Way
256/705-7007 - FAX 256/705-7100 Huntsville, AL 35801
--
Did you check the web site first?: http://www.crynwr.com/lego-robotics
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) Sorry to step in here. But there is no difference (as I see it) between having a system library function that runs the motors and having a byte code that runs the motors. It's all a matter of encoding. If I say: set_motor_speed(MOTOR1, 20); (...) (26 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
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
