 | | Double echo —Sergey Udovenko
|
| | | Hi Ralph, I just tried out to remove all EMITs from ACCEPT word, in order to eliminate back echo from RCX. It works good: less Frame Errors and Break Interrupts from comm port during the session. And you can use "normal" terminal program, like (...) (25 years ago, 22-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| | | |
| | | | | RE: Double echo —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | (...) This is a good idea Sergey. Obvoiusly you have got a set of tools up to build the pbForth from the distribution. Does the makefile work OK for you? I might suggest that I add a word that turns the echos off or on? How does ECHO_OFF ( -- ) (...) (25 years ago, 26-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Double echo —Sergey Udovenko
|
| | | | Hi Ralph, (...) Yes, it works. After fighting for a while with Cygwin32 + binutils (it's still present a bug in linker configuration), finally I got the development environment. Your makefile works fine so it was very easy to get pbFORTH compiled. (...) (25 years ago, 26-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | RE: Double echo —Ralph Hempel
|
| | | | 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)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Double echo —Sergey Udovenko
|
| | | | (...) 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)
|
| | | | |
