 | | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
(...) I went with simple... #pragma reserve start [end] where [end] is assumed to be start if not specified. If you want to reserve multiple vars (or multiple ranges) you need to use multiple #pragmas. (...) Yes, its all a bit academic. The only (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
(...) How about: #pragma reserve 1 3 5-8 9 with range explicitly specified by "-". Then those that want to specify a range can do so and those who want to specify a list can do so. Of course this assumes that you don't allow arithmetic in the pragma (...) (24 years ago, 2-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.2 a2
|
|
(...) I'm really busy recently; it'll probably be a few more days before I have the Linux builds done. (Since it's an alpha release, it doesn't make my top priority list. I'll drop everything for the final release. *grin*) (24 years ago, 31-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | MacNQC 2.2 a2
|
|
Alpha release of MacNQC 2.2 is at (URL) the most part this release just incorporates the latest NQC compiler into the MacNQC GUI. Dave Baum (25 years ago, 30-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
(...) I would suggest leaving it simple. For example: #pragma 1 Would reserve var. one. #pragma 1 5 9 10 31 Would reserve var.'s 1, 5, 9, 10 & 31 It's the easiest to see at a glance and would be easy to adjust as you changed your code. Dean -- (...) (25 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC 2.2 a2
|
|
Second alpha release of NQC 2.2 is at (2 URLs) for the list of changes. Dave Baum (25 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Although I would much prefer to see NQC reserveing the variables for itself, I prefer the syntax with a start and end on it. #pragma reserve 1 3 James P (25 years ago, 29-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Dave Baum schreef: (...) This looks a bit confusing, the alternative looks more logical to me. (...) Now this I can understand :-) Looks awesome. (25 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Dave Baum schreef: (...) 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 (...) (25 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
