Subject:
|
Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
|
Date:
|
Sun, 28 May 2000 22:41:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2024 times
|
| |
|
|
Dave Baum schreef:
> At present I'm leaning more towards a #pragma rather than introducing
> another keyword into the language...
>
> // reserve RCX variable location 1
> #pragma reserve 1
>
> How does this sound? Would people prefer a language construct for this
> (and if so, what should it be)?
It looks perfectly logical to me. Will it be possible to reserve a range or
do we need to reserve each location separately?
No need for an extra keyword indeed.
(It's hard enough already. Well I guess part of that comes from not using
RCXCC but the VI editor in Linux instead ;-)
--
Jan-Albert "Anvil" van Ree | http://www.nl.3dgamers.com
3D Sims Archive maintainer | http://www.3dgamers.com
Thrustmaster Resource Center | http://www.3dgamers.com/tmresourcecenter/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
| (...) Handling a range should't be too tough - perhaps like this #pragma start [count] where count is assumed to be 1 if not present // reserve location 1 #pragma 1 // reserve locations 5,6 and 7 #pragma 5 3 --- The alternative would be #pragma (...) (25 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
| The fact that in RCX2 the counters are overlapped with global variables has brought about an interesting problem. How should a programmer indicate to the NQC compiler that a certain RCX variable location is to be left untouched (not assigned to any (...) (25 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
8 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
|
|
|
|
