 | | NQC 2.2 a2
|
|
Second alpha release of NQC 2.2 is at (2 URLs) for the list of changes. Dave Baum (24 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Although I would much prefer to see NQC reserveing the variables for itself, I prefer the syntax with a start and end on it. #pragma reserve 1 3 James P (24 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | winlegos needed
|
|
I am in desperate need of the winlegos installation file. I have lost my own, my installation is corrupt, and without a correct installation I can't work. Pretty please, someone. /Torkel (24 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: debugging gcc or ld
|
|
I found the problem. gcc hosted on LinuxPPC uses unsigned chars by default, and one of the h8300 support files for gas assumes signed chars. The bug fix was easy, but rather than take a chance on other lurking signed/unsigned errors, I just forced (...) (24 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | debugging gcc or ld
|
|
I'm trying to get started with legOS but I'm having some trouble getting things to link because I keep getting 'relocation truncated' errors. In order to determine if its ld or gcc that's at fault, could someone with a functional (...) (24 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Dave Baum schreef: (...) This looks a bit confusing, the alternative looks more logical to me. (...) Now this I can understand :-) Looks awesome. (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
(...) Handling a range should't be too tough - perhaps like this #pragma start [count] where count is assumed to be 1 if not present // reserve location 1 #pragma 1 // reserve locations 5,6 and 7 #pragma 5 3 --- The alternative would be #pragma (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Dave Baum schreef: (...) It looks perfectly logical to me. Will it be possible to reserve a range or do we need to reserve each location separately? No need for an extra keyword indeed. (It's hard enough already. Well I guess part of that comes from (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
The fact that in RCX2 the counters are overlapped with global variables has brought about an interesting problem. How should a programmer indicate to the NQC compiler that a certain RCX variable location is to be left untouched (not assigned to any (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Differences between RCX 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0?
|
|
(...) From what I've gathered: 1.0 to 1.5 Removed the power adapter board. Less components on the board. 1.0 to 2.0 from what I gathered a slightly newer board with a 32k ROM instead of the 16K in the 1.0. (The 1.0 is designed to hold a 32k ROM. As (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
