 | | Re: Roboarm.nqh
|
|
(...) I'm glad you're enjoying the book. Not including more information about where to put include files was definitely an oversight - I'll update the book's web pages when I get a chance. Dave (25 years ago, 22-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Roboarm.nqh
|
|
I was using the RcxCC program. I put the nqh file in the RcxCC directory and everything worked fine. Thanks for the information. By the way, I am really enjoying your book. I hope everyone gets a chance to read and use it. -- Bob Fay (...) (25 years ago, 22-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Roboarm.nqh
|
|
(...) The idea behind including files is that it allows a common set of definitions and/or functions to be shared by multiple programs. NQC by default searches the current directory for any include files. It is also possible to specify a search path (...) (25 years ago, 22-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Roboarm.nqh
|
|
I am working my way through Dave Baums' Mindstorm book and I have lost my way regarding the #include command. The roboarm1.nqc program calls for roboarm.nqh to be included. The program will not compile because it "cannot open roboarm.nqh". Some (...) (25 years ago, 22-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Can't compile test.nqc
|
|
(...) There is very little difference in the compiler itself between 1.0 mode and normal mode. Most of the changes are due to a new API file that is included (rcx_nqh.h). If something went wrong with building this file, that may cause a crash. To (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Can't compile test.nqc
|
|
Hi, I have been trying to compile NQC (2.0.2) with the watcom compiler under QNX and succeded partialy. I can now compile the test.nqc from version 1.3 in backward compatibility mode (bin/nqc -1 testv1.nqc). But I can't compile the new test.nqc (...) (25 years ago, 20-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: How did you made nqc?
|
|
I second that. Thanks for the explanation. It made a good after word for your book! (...) Joel Shafer joel@connect.net (25 years ago, 16-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: How did you made nqc?
|
|
(...) Yes, a lot of work...which is why the "iteration" part was so important. Individually, none of the steps were too time consuming, and each had a lot of positive feedback associated with it...which served to motivate me for the next step. The (...) (25 years ago, 16-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: How did you made nqc?
|
|
(...) Thanks for your reply, this exactly what I (and probably others) wanted to know. It seems that it took a lot of work, time and knowledge... Thanks again ! Philippe (25 years ago, 15-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: How did you made nqc?
|
|
(...) I started to compose a reply, but it wandered a bit off-topic and was getting quite long. I posted the resulting text here: (URL) this the sort of thing you were looking for, or perhaps more in-depth explanation of some of the algorithms used, (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
