Subject:
|
Re: Functional languages and/or RCX wrapper code
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Nov 1999 20:57:11 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
634 times
|
| |
|
|
In article <19991115183620.23320.rocketmail@web905.mail.yahoo.com>, Brian
Connors <connorbd@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Someone (Vlad Dumitrescu(sp?), I believe) mentioned
> the possibility of writing a wrapper for the RCX
> serial protocol. Well, I've been taking a look at
> Kekoa's send.c, and as long as Kekoa's cool with it
> I'm trying to slice and dice it into an API called
> Seance (basically factoring out his comm functions
> from the rest of the program), this with an eye
> towards possibly reimplementing spirit.ocx as a
> platform-independent C library called Spectre. It's in
> the early stages, though, so don't expect usable any
> time soon. (However, if there's interest (==
> contributed routines), I'll be glad to give more
> details.)
You may want to take a look at some or all of the rcxlib portion of the
NQC source (http://www.enteract.com/~dbaum/nqc). It already includes a
portable comm implementation across Win/Mac/Unix. I think its also a bit
more robust in terms of communication protocol than the send.c code. For
example, rcxlib includes adaptive timeouts.
On the other hand, rcxlib involves about a half dozen C++ classes. If
you're looking for something simple and/or non-C++, then send.c is the
ticket.
Dave
--
reply to: dbaum at enteract dot com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Functional languages and/or RCX wrapper code
|
| On the subject of functional programming on the RCX -- it sort of depends on how you define functional. If you want an API binding from a functional language, that's one thing; I think that's what Haskell/Lego is all about if I read the page (...) (25 years ago, 15-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
