 | | Re: InstallShield for legOS
|
|
"Rossz Vámos-Wentworth" <rossw@jps.net> wrote in message news:387CE039.2906B6...jps.net... (...) I think that you should still reconsider using Cygwin anyway. You can actually build much of the LegOS stuff without ever using the Cygwin shell, so (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | InstallShield for legOS
|
|
As mentioned by Markus, I am working on an Windows InstallShield program for legOS. It is my hope to create, with assistance, a complete installation package for legOS and required tools. Running the installer will create a legOS developement (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | NQC 2.1 b2 Linux binaries + rpm (was Re: NQC 2.1 b2 in beta test)
|
|
I put up a Linux binary package in tar.gz format + rpm + source in srpm format at: <URL:(URL). I'd appreciate it if folks would look at it and tell me if I've done anything stupid. (Especially in the RPM.) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.1 b2 in beta test
|
|
(...) Not that I'm complaining or anything :) but is the 'listen' feature I talked about a while ago in the plan for the future? I'll work on making Linux builds today if I have a chance. (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | RE: TpForth Project ?
|
|
(...) Mario wrote... (...) Mario, Thanks for following this up. I've heard about tpStudio - it was started at least a year ago. The GUI is neat, but it has one problem which interferes with pbForth - it only runs on Windows. :-( I'm still trying to (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Please provide diffs for legOS releases
|
|
Hi Alex, I'll post a cvs rdiff later. Alex Wetmore schrieb: (...) Rossz Vamos-Wentworth is working on an InstallShield version for Windows. (...) There's a watchdog timer module on the RCX, which is currently unused in legOS. Shouldn't bee too (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
Dave Baum schrieb: (...) Yes, definitely so. Many concepts in parser generators are actually OO (bison result types, for example), but they aren't implemented that way. (...) Prof. Goos rather convincingly advocates generation as the do-all and (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | offtopicy sort of thing
|
|
Ok, so it's nothing to do with nqc and not much to do with mindstorms, but here's a nice bit of elementary physics I came across while playing with my RIS: Take two 9v dc lego motors like the ones you got with the RCX. Stick something, a wheel or a (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Yippee!
|
|
My copy of Dave's book has just arrived! But I'm stuck at work for the next 8 hours so I can't play with it. Boo. -- Mark Rendle Est nunc salvus cessare vester computare (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.1 b2 in beta test
|
|
Will this work with the current RcxCC? Or will there be a new version of that to follow soon? -- Mark Rendle Est nunc salvus cessare vester computare Dave Baum <dbaum@spambgoneenteract.com> wrote in message news:dbaum-110100215...act.com... (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
