|
|
 | | Re: Some goals, ideas, etc. for a new bytecode interpreter (long)
|
| (...) While I agree that it should be similar, I think it may need some minor modifications to make it truly useful. For example, I would like to be able to control the motors without having to load a program or use a host computer. It would be nice (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| | | | | Re: Ir transmission
|
| (...) I can't get EMIT to work, in NQC I do this: SendMessage(255); // Flash Sleep(3); ThisRaw = RAW_LIGHT; and the raw light sensor reading has big spikes for IR reflections. but: [ HEX ] FF EMIT 30 msWait RawLight LIGHT? does not, I think that (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | Re: Some goals, ideas, etc. for a new bytecode interpreter (long)
|
| (...) In light of some of your points raised earlier and consideration since I first brought it up, I can see that bytecode level compatibility is not strictly required. By Look & Feel, I refer only to the observable behaviour of the RCX, not the (...) (25 years ago, 9-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| | | | | Re: Some goals, ideas, etc. for a new bytecode interpreter (long)
|
| (...) What do you mean by end-user? Does keeping the end-user look and feel mean keeping the existing opcodes intact? You seemed to have mentioned this as a goal before but maintaining just the "look and feel" might no longer mean that. Also, you (...) (25 years ago, 8-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
| | | | | Some clarification
|
| (...) I was not suggesting creating a potential for an L&F lawsuit from Lego by duplicating their Mindstorms product for Windows or some other PC platform, I was suggesting imitating the look & feel of their firmware on the RCX itself. (Not that I (...) (25 years ago, 8-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
|
