|
|
 | | Re: Double echo
|
| (...) Standalone loader would be nice. (...) Well, the most important, of course, is the stack bug. BTW, what about multitasker? How many cells would you recommend to allocate? Should be it checked by HAT word or not? (...) Sure, I would like to (...) (25 years ago, 27-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | RE: Double echo
|
| (...) Yup. Dave tells me he is working on integrating the speedier loader into NQC or even making standalone loaders by themselves... Sergey, which features do you REALLY want/need for the next release. I'm doing the following... 1. ECHO_ON/ECHO_OFF (...) (25 years ago, 27-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | Re: Double echo
|
| (...) I also think that standardisation is not a primary goal in our case ;) I still can't see a real necessity to have it as switchable feature, but having these ECHO_ON / ECHO_OFF available it's better then nothing. Would be nice to have them in a (...) (25 years ago, 27-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | RE: fast firmware downloader
|
| (...) Count me in. I'm ditching the Tcl interface - it's just too damn goofy! A standard firmware downloader would be great - especially if it ran on all platforms. As far As I know, Dave Baum is the only guy here who has got a downloader for the (...) (25 years ago, 27-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
| | | | | RE: Double echo
|
| Sergey wrote: <Discussion of ECHO_ON ECHO_OFF snipped> (...) Personally, this is a BIG advantage. Users who do not have access to Tcl now have to deal with double respose characters. A simple ECHO_OFF at the beginning of their script and they now (...) (25 years ago, 27-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
|
