| |
Juergen Stuber wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> Chris Barker <chris@superfami.com> writes:
>
> > #1 if ((SensorValueRaw(1) & SensorValueRaw(0)) != 255)
>
>
> this is a bit crazy, unless your sensor value is a bit pattern.
That is what I thought, but it will determine if the touch sensor is
pressed.
>
> > #2 if ((SensorValueRaw(1) != 255) || (SensorValueRaw(0) != 255))
>
>
> This is sensible, but are you sure it's ok to use equality
> and not inequalities like SensorValueRaw(1) < 240?
Dunno, I'll try. Then again, if !=255 works...
>
> > Number two is obvious but rather verbose, number one is just wierd!
>
>
> but it's equivalent, also in C, where & is bitwise and.
>
>
> > Since I'm accustomed to Perl which allows extreme lazyness I would have
> > thought that I could just do this:
> >
> > if ((SensorValueRaw(1) || SensorValueRaw(0) != 255))
> >
> > But that does not work. Is this normal in NQC?
>
>
> Fortunately.
>
> Jürgen "who thinks Perl is an abomination"
If it were not for Perl I'd never write a line of code ^_^
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
6 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
