Subject:
|
Re: NQC 2.1 b2 in beta test
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 20:21:19 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@!nomorespam!mattdm.org
|
Viewed:
|
1551 times
|
| |
|
|
Joel Shafer <joel@shafersystems.com> wrote:
> Of course it may be too far down the development road to break apart the
> communication and compiler portions of NQC into two different executables.
If this is done, the compiler should have an option to spit out compiled
bytecode on stdout, and the rcxcomm program should have a matching option to
accept bytecodes on stdin and send them to the rcx.
And then there should be a wrapper that does just that.
Otherwise, the -d functionality would be lost, and that would be
inconvenient.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: NQC 2.1 b2 in beta test
|
| (...) I think NQC should be strictly a compiler. It seems like it would be more manageable for both developers and users if the RCX communication pieces were in a separate executable. This change should make NQC completely portable (if there is such (...) (25 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
