Subject:
|
Re: Ideas for NQC
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
|
Date:
|
Tue, 9 Mar 2004 19:23:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6951 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Now that Dave Baum has given you the control under NQC, how will you manage to
> work both on NQC and on BricxCC???
>
> I recomend the following changes:
>
> For NQC, something that you can add is optional use of semi-colon. It's a pain
> when I do
> a program as simple as this:
>
> task main()
> {
> On(OUT_A)
> }
I object to this proposed change. Lack of knowledge of a language's syntax does
not justify changing the syntax.
>
> and the compiler says:
> line 4: Error: parse error.
> Semi-colon is not necessary if commands are in different lines, they are only
> necessary between commands in the same line. I think this is not part of the
> API, it is part of the programming language.
[SNIP]
Kevin
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | RE: Ideas for NQC
|
| (...) I could not agree more with Kevin. Adding a feature, such as adding in more intricate math functions, or add in tcp/ip socket support, etc. is more fruitful than making the language syntax more like others just because someone is not used to (...) (20 years ago, 9-Mar-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Ideas for NQC
|
| Hi John, Now that Dave Baum has given you the control under NQC, how will you manage to work both on NQC and on BricxCC??? I recomend the following changes: For NQC, something that you can add is optional use of semi-colon. It's a pain when I do a (...) (20 years ago, 8-Mar-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
29 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
