 | | One Big Program
|
|
I'm going to follow Dave's suggestion in an earlier post, and post to this group, on an issue I raised to him earlier: The three principal limitations to "large" program development on the RCX are: 1. 32 variables globally 2. 8 subroutines/ program (...) (26 years ago, 23-Feb-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 1.2 in beta testing
|
|
The thing to remember about legOS is that pretty much anything you can do in C (gcc, egcs) in 32k of RAM, you can do with legOS. I believe that both legOS and NQC have definite places in the RCX programming universe. I happen to have been using gcc (...) (26 years ago, 22-Feb-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | RE: NQC 1.2 in beta testing
|
|
Well, those are still cool new functions...I will keep wishing the RCX firmware allowed runtime evaluations instead of constants. Maybe LegOS does...does anyone know? Rich (URL) Message----- From: news-gateway@lugnet.com (...) (26 years ago, 22-Feb-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 1.2 in beta testing
|
|
(...) No, you still wouldn't be able to do that since the RCX bytecode to play a tone requires compile time constants as its arguments. The scoping would let you put variables inside of tasks (hiding them from other tasks), if you wanted... task foo (...) (26 years ago, 22-Feb-99, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 1.2 in beta testing
|
|
(...) Yep, MT-newswatcher can do that. Sorry I didn't remember to crosspost - must've been brain dead or something. (...) Very cool. A lot of people send me e-mail about NQC. I'll encourage them to raise issues on lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc instead - (...) (26 years ago, 22-Feb-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
