 | | NQC 2.2 now in beta
|
|
See (URL) for more information. Dave Baum (24 years ago, 23-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: global output control
|
|
(...) I thought about this for a while, when I was thinking about "obvert". In one sense, "invert" does imply that inversing again will revert (*grin*), but I don't believe that this meaning is implicit. There is another sense which simply means "to (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: global output control
|
|
(...) The problem I have with ForwardOutput() and ReverseOutput() is that the terms 'forward' and 'reverse' already have a meaning - specifically they refer to motor directions... Fwd(OUT_A); Rev(OUT_B); If you then 'reverse' the global direction... (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | RE: global output control
|
|
(...) Ummm, how about... ReverseOutput(const int outs); // global reverse ForwardOutput(const int outs); // global fwd Reverse kind of implies invert, but I don't think that will matter to many folks... Cheers, Ralph Hempel - P.Eng ---...--- Check (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: global output control
|
|
(...) We must have the same twisted sense of humor since the necessity of putting it in the FAQ pretty much tipped the scales for me. ObvertOutput() it is! Dave p.s. We'll see if I'm still laughing when people start e-mailing me about it. (24 years ago, 22-Jun-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
