Subject:
|
Re: lack of interest in basic stamp and basicx
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Nov 1999 16:20:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
462 times
|
| |
|
|
The reason I use NQC and have not gone to legOS is related to the rest of my
life. I am a software consultant - I write programs all day long. I prefer to
focus on the mechanical aspect of robotics instead of the programming.
So far NQC has not limited my abilities in any way. I havn't gone above 10
variables, much less come close to the max. NQC does what I need it to. Also,
from what I have read - logOS is difficult to install on NT - my current
available platform. NQC was so easy it almost installed itself. I have Linux
here but it is not installed on any machine right now and won't until I
reconfigure some things.
When the day comes (and I'm sure it will) that I require things not available in
NQC I will look at other options, but until then I am very pleased with what I
am using.
-Wes
Jonathan Perret wrote:
>
> > Hi
> > I am a little bit curious as to why there seems to
> > be such a lack of interest in the Parallax Basic Stamp
> > and its new high powered alternative the Basicx.
>
> What I've always wondered about the Basic Stamp is why anyone would
> want to use Basic to program an microcontroller.
> I love Basic but when coding for a robot I want to take full
> advantage of the hardware, and that means programming it in Forth
> or C. There isn't anything you can do in Basic that you can't do
> by programming the firware yourself.
> The same goes for NQC or orther tools relying on the standard Lego
> firmware. Why people insist on using the Lego firmware when it
> imposes completely artificial limitations on things you can do in
> your programs ?
> I don't mean to say that NQC is not an outstanding tool, I just
> don't understand why people who are ready to mess with electronics
> to build homemade sensors don't take the plunge and code directly
> to the metal...
>
> Confused,
> --Jonathan
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: lack of interest in basic stamp and basicx
|
| (...) What I've always wondered about the Basic Stamp is why anyone would want to use Basic to program an microcontroller. I love Basic but when coding for a robot I want to take full advantage of the hardware, and that means programming it in Forth (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
