To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 9301
9300  |  9302
Subject: 
Re: Mindstorms spirit.ocx programming = RCX ASM coding?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:32:35 GMT
Viewed: 
738 times
  
In article <Fn6B2x.6Az@lugnet.com>, "Ian Warfield" <ipw47@hotmail.com> wrote:

In lugnet.robotics, Matthew Miller writes:
[...]
So, an advantage of NQC is that it allows you to generate programs for the
RCX using a relatively high-level language, whereas with VB, while you're
using a high-level language to write your UI, the guts of what runs on the
actual brick is done at a low level.

That sounds accurate.  While I'll concede that NQC is more understandable in
its use of variable management and mathematical notation, the Spirit OCX is
more useful to me because of its Windows VB implementation.  I can easily
write GUIs and real-time interfaces with my robots.  And it's definitely the
way to go if you're using the computer as a "host station" to control a roving
RCX.  Plus - no offense to Dave or anything - I feel a little more comfortable
using the Spirit SDK since it's "LEGO sanctioned".  (Plus you get this neat
little pamphlet explaining the ins and outs of the RCX and the Spirit
language, which is fun to read.)


My biggest gripe about spirit is that it is only available for Win32.  If
it had also been available on Mac and Linux I would've layered NQC on top
of it and never had to create a non "LEGO sanctioned" interface to the
RCX.  Actually, TLG now appears to acknowledge NQC as a legitimate way to
develop for the RCX - at least that's how I interpret their change to
allow NQC programs to be directly uploaded to www.legomindstorms.com.

Yes, spirit has a definite advantage when you're building something where
part will run on the host computer and part will run on the RCX.  NQC is
really only intended to craft software to run on the RCX itself.

Bottom line: I'm all for a variety of tools.  The "best" tool is the one
that fits comfortably in the hand of its user and is effective for present
task.  Given the variation of both tasks and hands, its unlikely that any
single tool will be perfect for everything.

Dave Baum

--
reply to: dbaum at enteract dot com



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Mindstorms spirit.ocx programming = RCX ASM coding?
 
(...) Certainly; and it's in their best interest, too. And anything that elicits formal recognition from LEGO - even if in a slightly backhanded way like this - is worthy of respect, given their past and as-yet-still-current policy of not (...) (25 years ago, 23-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Mindstorms spirit.ocx programming = RCX ASM coding?
 
(...) Not at all. I doubt that LEGO would depart too far from their opcode protocols when writing their SDK, especially as it's designed for advanced users, and the syntax of the language seems to mirror assembly. From what I've seen, the Spirit OCX (...) (25 years ago, 23-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics)

5 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR