Subject:
|
Re: global output control
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Jun 2000 16:11:03 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
mattdm@mattdm[StopSpammers].org
|
Viewed:
|
1742 times
|
| |
|
|
alex wetmore <alex@phred.org> wrote:
> > ObvertOutput?
> I think RevertOutput is fine. I actually wonder how often that call
> will end being used in user's programs?
The only problem is that "revert" implies that invert must be called first,
and I don't think that is the case.
--
Matthew Miller ---> mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us ---> http://quotes-r-us.org/
Boston University Linux ---> http://linux.bu.edu/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: global output control
|
| "Matthew Miller" <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote in message news:slrn8kshgc.sof.....bu.edu... (...) first, (...) It won't do any good to call Revert without Invert though... I guess one confusion with Revert is that it wouldn't switch the output back to (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: global output control
|
| "Matthew Miller" <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote in message news:slrn8kpub3.v5a.....bu.edu... (...) "RevertOutput". (...) I think RevertOutput is fine. I actually wonder how often that call will end being used in user's programs? The InvertOutput command (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
12 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
|
|
|
|
