 | | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) For more fun with asserts: See if your compiler supports the FILE and LINE macros (or something equivilant). #ifdef NDEBUG #define assert(x) ((void)0) #else #define assert(x) if (x) else assertfail(FILE,LINE); #endif your assert_fail function (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementation of Installable Timers
|
|
(...) You are right. I found in an app that I was using that if I pressed the run / stop button, my task would be killed, and leave a dangling timer - which would usually blow the little brick into the weeds :o) I 'solved' it in a crude way by (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: ...2 years later... :-) (was: newbie again part 2)
|
|
(...) It's been a long time since I looked at any of this, but I don't think the version of the NQC compiler is an issue, nor is the -1 option. The .rcx file format has been pretty stable for a long time. The -1 allows old source programs to be (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Q for Ralph
|
|
Why, exactly, does pbForth use a terminal emulator for the PC to talk to the RCX? Although I admit I find it an interesting concept (it's got a certain nostalgic appeal, at least for me), the design seems to encourage leaving the RCX on for extended (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | IR problems
|
|
Hi, I was having some problems in a program I'm writing in PbForth and it seems that it could be related to the way I communicate thru IR. I use the Lego remote control. I joined the following code to demonstrate. I use the word 'getHeader' from (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | ...2 years later... :-) (was: newbie again part 2)
|
|
Hello All, In lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, Dave Baum wrote (almost two years ago, Thu, 17 Jan 2002 00:34:56 GMT -- your words are cherished, Dave! :-): (...) [...] (...) Well, I am not (yet) a Java programmer, but try to become one, and would like to (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementation of Installable Timers
|
|
Iain McInnes wrote: [snip] (...) Great idea! (...) In your implementation, would it be possible for the client task to be killed (in the case of a run-away task)... causing the struct to be deallocated... while the struct is still in the linked (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Points to: 'Implementation of Installable Timers'
|
|
Hi, ppl. I posted this one in the wrong place :0 (URL) Enjoy ! Iain. (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Points to 'Design by Contract'
|
|
Hi, Folks, I posted some stuff on an assert() macro - in the wrong place - (D'oH). The thread is here: (URL) Enjoy ! Iain. (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) I agree it seems to be the wrong way round. That's the standard implementation. NDEBUG seems to stand for "No debug". One advantage of making it negative, is that you get the assert()s if you don't do anything (ie dont define NDEBUG). BTW, (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
