 | | Re: TpForth Project ?
|
|
(...) compiling (...) to (...) Following Harald's suggestion yesterday I downloaded the (big) TPForth Developer Studio. My very first impression is it would be a very cool tool to use together with pbForth. In the comments field of the downloading (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
Thank you, David. Your gode is great! I learned a lot from your quick example, though I prefer Java more. I will encapsulate RCX commands in some utility objects and use them in more higher level objects. What I focus now is make a RF/IR adapter to (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
(...) OO works very well for things like a parse tree. I can add a new statement and just add its rules for semantic checking and code generation...all within its own class. I think part of the problem is that compiler design is a very heavily (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Please provide diffs for legOS releases
|
|
Today I had a bit of time on the bus so I went through the work of getting legOS working on my system. After I got it up and running I noticed that I was using 0.2.2 and that 0.2.3 was out (I started with 0.2.2 becuase the most recent instructions (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | NQC 2.1 b2 in beta test
|
|
Major features for 2.1: Scout support fast firmware download switch statement expressions may be used as conditions NQC_OPTIONS variable The downloads (including a README with more detailed info) are at the usual place... (URL) Baum p.s. The ## (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
