|
|
 | | Re: PRGM button - am I missing something?
|
| Ben Jackson schrieb: (...) OK, I'll change the docs and examples, then. Too bad, I thought position-independence very nifty indeed. Markus. (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| | | | | Re: useful battery program
|
| Ben Jackson schrieb: (...) Saved my life a couple of times, when LNP was locking up the system in an entirely incomprehensible way. (I'd really appreciate "Unreachable code" warnings sometimes... or maybe they scrolled away.) (...) How about this: a (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| | | | | Re: PRGM button - am I missing something?
|
| (...) From getopt(3) on BSD and other systems: When all options have been processed (i.e., up to the first non-option argument), getopt() returns -1. However, from the Linux manpage: By default, getopt() permutes the contents of argv as it scans, so (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| | | | | Re: PRGM button - am I missing something?
|
| Ben Jackson schrieb: (...) If getopt is working right, the position of switches shouldn't matter. If they do, it's broken. Markus. (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| | | | | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
| I should probably mention again that legOS supports C++, and supports it even better if you add void*builtin_new(size_t n){return malloc(n)}; to the appropriate library, as v0.3.0 will. The rest of this is off-topic. Dave Baum schrieb: (...) (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
|
