Subject:
|
Re: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 5 May 1999 21:08:33 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
John A. Tamplin <jat@liveonthenet.(StopSpammers)com>
|
Viewed:
|
1077 times
|
| |
|
|
On Wed, 5 May 1999, Kekoa Proudfoot wrote:
> I see what you like about having a FixedPoint type and being able to say
>
> a = b.Multiply(c)
>
> This gives you the flexibility to add modules as you need them by dumping
> all the work onto the compiler, which is not a bad place if you are not the
> compiler writer.
If it is an object oriented language, it isn't the compiler writer it is
a library writer.
> It does not work in all cases, though; you will probably have a hard time
> implementing a FloatingPoint type, for example, unless the new firmware
> supported these natively.
Assuming the language has the flexibility, you could certainly do the FP
emulation in the library as well. However, you lose the ability to take
advantage of hardware support if it isn't built into the language, but it
is unlikely any future RCX replacement would have FP hardware. Of course,
doing FP emulation in an interpreted language would certainly be slower.
> There seems to be a rather large gray area surrounding which features are
> needed and which features would be nice to have. My opinion is somewhat
> split on this topic - if a new byte code is designed now, I know there
> is a good chance that design will not change much, severely influencing how
> the byte code can and will be used later on; I also know that starting off
> with an overly complicated byte code is a mistake, it will never get
> finished.
I think a key feature of whatever is decided on is modularity. Do what
has to be done in the interpreter itself, and then allow additional
packages to be loaded for additional functionality. Ie, if you want a
fixed-point math package, load that and use it, and if you don't leave it
out and use that RAM for something else.
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 has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) I meant that the compiler writer now needs to support objects, which is a bit of extra work over what I have imagined the compiler writer putting into this. I did not state this clearly by any means. I agree, it also adds work for the library (...) (25 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) I see what you like about having a FixedPoint type and being able to say a = b.Multiply(c) This gives you the flexibility to add modules as you need them by dumping all the work onto the compiler, which is not a bad place if you are not the (...) (25 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
32 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
|
|
|
|
