Subject:
|
NQC default output file
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Jan 2000 20:34:40 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
MATTDM@MATTDM.nospamORG
|
Viewed:
|
1415 times
|
| |
|
|
I was checking to see if NQC already does have an option to spit bytecodes
to stdout (-L would work, if rcxcomm would understand the format) and I came
across something that seems nonintuitive to me. The default output file is
"named the same as the input file, but with an extension of '.rcx' instead
of '.nqc'", according to the user manual. Wouldn't it make more sense to use
the basename of the file and output to the current directory?
In order to test nqc, I was doing
jadzia:~$ nqc /usr/doc/nqc-2.1.b2/test.nqc
and nothing happened! (Oh yeah, this brings up another problem -- if it
can't write the file, it ought to complain!) When I copied the file to /tmp,
and did
jadzia:~$ nqc /tmp/test.nqc
I ended up with test.rcx in /tmp/, not ~. This is exactly as documented, of
course, but not what I expect to happen.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: NQC default output file
|
| I don't think it's nonintuitive. I think it makes sense to have the output go to the same directory as the input. That way you can have a directory set up for the executable with only read/execute permissions, and yet have all of your source & (...) (24 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
| | | Re: NQC default output file
|
| (...) I just added the error check to nqc. I haven't changed the directory yet, though. Using the source directory was strictly from laziness. Assuming there aren't massive objections, I'll switch to using the current directory. Dave Baum (24 years ago, 15-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
