Is it worth reviving the PropScope OpenSource Project?

2»

Comments

  • rbehmrbehm Posts: 56
    edited 2019-03-22 - 01:26:35
    Roy Eltham wrote: »
    rbehm,
    BSTC isn't as strict about things as the official PropTool compiler. It also has features that don't work on PropTool.
    Technically the problems are with BSTC and your code using unofficial things (like the comma's in the enum, or using a local variable with the same name as a global). These are not problems with PropTool.

    The local vs global variable one is something that I would consider a bug in BSTC, because it makes the code confusing to read. Plus, how are you supposed to access the global variable from the function that has a local of the same name?
    Of course, I'm sure BSTC regards it as a feature, but it's a bad one.

    Roy I did not want to blame PropTool. I like some of the additional features that BSTC has (like #ifdef... ). I come from different languages (C, C++, PL/I, ...) and I am used to have local variables and parameters that are distinct. If I want to access a global then I know hat I have to take care and not to hide it behind a local declaration. For me SPINs handling of names is sometimes an annoyance and I get often caught by this because out of habit with other languages. But I know there is no discussion about this. It has been decided and has to be accepted.
    --
    Reinhardt
  • Life has been busy and I haven't had time to checked this thread. The idea of using the P2 seems interesting but I was more interested in reviving development for the existing PropScope for current users since it has long been abandoned. I forgot about rbehm's awesome work on it. I'll have to check it out. I do remember some work being done to use multiple cogs to get it up to 20MHz. If I can find those files I'll look at modifying rbehm's code for multiple cogs.
Sign In or Register to comment.