7 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 09:38 AM
Does anyone know the exact differences between the two? Which one is more difficult / flexible / powerful? I know that the ComputerCraft's Turtle mod is a big trump card over RP Control but I like full packages and unless CC is a total Ace compared to RP Control, I would stick with RP Control just to keep the entire set of Eloraam's mods. Can anyone convince me otherwise?
56 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 09:43 AM
so CC was inspired by the idea of eloram and the idea of RP lives much longer than CC. but for me CC is easyer ´cause i worked with the lua code since 1.0 and i am not so good to learn new coding languages like FORTH in RP.
so for ME: CC
7 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 09:49 AM
so CC was inspired by the idea of eloram and the idea of RP lives much longer than CC. but for me CC is easyer ´cause i worked with the lua code since 1.0 and i am not so good to learn new coding languages like FORTH in RP.
so for ME: CC
I think I've also noticed that all the programming functions and all their addons (like floppy disks and such) are all compiled into fewer blocks in CC. What I mean is, RPC has more blocks for the same functionality than CC does, plus CC comes with Turtle (cannot be understated :)/>/>). Can anyone confirm this? Am I right in saying this?
56 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 09:51 AM
so CC was inspired by the idea of eloram and the idea of RP lives much longer than CC. but for me CC is easyer ´cause i worked with the lua code since 1.0 and i am not so good to learn new coding languages like FORTH in RP.
so for ME: CC
I think I've also noticed that all the programming functions and all their addons (like floppy disks and such) are all compiled into fewer blocks in CC. What I mean is, RPC has more blocks for the same functionality than CC does, plus CC comes with Turtle (cannot be understated :)/>/>). Can anyone confirm this? Am I right in saying this?
RIGHT! :)/>/>
496 posts
Location
New Zealand
Posted 05 May 2012 - 10:05 AM
The main difference is:
CC is a Lua interpreter, RPC is a full 6502 processor emulator with a FORTH OS packaged on a floppy.
7 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 10:15 AM
The main difference is:
CC is a Lua interpreter, RPC is a full 6502 processor emulator with a FORTH OS packaged on a floppy.
Sorry, But I don't quite understand the latter. What exactly does that mean? Is it more difficult to handle than the LUA interpreter? If so, is it more advanced, powerful, and flexible? Hence the difficulty?
510 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 10:54 AM
cc provides a whole enviroment and os system like when you buy a laptop today. The Redpower Computer should actually be called microcontroller. It is only a processing unit, nothing more. FORTH is very difficult to handle, at least if you are used to lua, but it has a comparatively small kernel that fits on the 8k RP memory. RP's microcontroller executes one instruction per tick, while the CC programs run on your computers processor (They are WAY faster).
Yes, one could say that programming RP computers is more difficult. But they also have advantages: They save their whole state on world save. That means you can unload the world or the chunk, and when you come back it is still working! That is long missing in computercraft. And if you totally dislike FORTH (as I do), write your favourite program in C, compile it for 6502 and use it as OS replacement.
992 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 12:14 PM
I think that CC is easer to use but RP is more realistic . CC has a simple language RP has a very complex language FORTH and assembly. CC is a better choice as it has bundled cable connectivity like a RP machine but with less drawbacks (execution speed).
in realty comes down to what ever one you like. but give both a try and see if you like it.
278 posts
Posted 05 May 2012 - 01:02 PM
Why not just use both?
CC:
Pros:
Easy way to make many programs, internet, disks etc
Cons:
Doesn't save world state, so you have to restart every time
RPC:
Pros:
Fun way to learn assembly before 0x10c comes out
Cons:
Harder to program, mostly un-used language
They pretty much balance each-other.
15 posts
Posted 06 May 2012 - 11:17 AM
OK the real difference between them is cc is lua based(which means it runs lua. full stop.) while redpowa runs a 6502 CPU. oh and come with a OS so you can do stuff with it. the reason it forth OS is because it can run in a low ram environment( 8 kbs!) but you( a programmer with a masters degree in building a OS) can make your own OS in assemble instead of forth. this allows much more lines of communication(Io expander!) allowing a massive control unit with a 1 MHz CPU while cc has 96 possible outputs but has the CPU powa of your PC. while cc has simple PC design red power control can have the CD drive and the monitor separate from the actual CPU
i'm not saying anyone above is wrong i'm just condensing some of it and listing some differences.
79 posts
Location
Germany
Posted 06 May 2012 - 11:22 AM
CC 4 the win
992 posts
Posted 06 May 2012 - 12:57 PM
this allows much more lines of communication(Io expander!) allowing a massive control unit with a 1 MHz CPU while cc has 96 possible outputs but has the CPU powa of your PC. while cc has simple PC design red power control can have the CD drive and the monitor separate from the actual CPU
you can control as many red power bundles as you like if you use wifi and programing in CC so no difference there.
15 posts
Posted 06 May 2012 - 01:08 PM
you can control as many red power bundles as you like if you use wifi and programing in CC so no difference there.
hate to be the bearer of bad news but
modem == "bundled cable" + "wireless"
modem == "16 wireless redstone connections"
modem == "one side of pc"
while modem == "all of the above" then
print("there the same execpt one doest have the wire")
end
im not saying that it has a max of 96 ,just that per pc it is 96 otherwise the whole point of my post is mute. not very fair if i compare one red powa pc to ten cc pc's now is it?
10 posts
Posted 24 May 2012 - 11:11 PM
Maximum per ONE PC is six bundles, that's right. But noone prevent you from expanding your clusted over multiple PC. You'll have it reduced to five bundles (80 lines) to allow for WiFi periphery attachment, but then you're only limited by the amount of PC's you're willing to deploy. Think "IO expanders, CC way."
2217 posts
Location
3232235883
Posted 24 May 2012 - 11:37 PM
i made a 8x8 light display with cc and it didnt lag at all besides client lag from lighting updates, managed to get it to update every single which i dont think control can do
123 posts
Posted 25 May 2012 - 07:57 AM
forget
1 posts
Posted 04 June 2012 - 08:20 PM
a VERY important factor is that because CC uses the computer's cpu, while it is faster it uses MUCH more processing power and crashes far more frequently than RP control.
… ComputerCraft's Turtle mod is a big trump card over RP …
TURTLES? TURTLES? who needs turtles when you can have FRAMES!!
351 posts
Posted 05 June 2012 - 12:26 AM
a VERY important factor is that because CC uses the computer's cpu, while it is faster it uses MUCH more processing power and crashes far more frequently than RP control.
TURTLES? TURTLES? who needs turtles when you can have FRAMES!!
Frames vs turtles? Why don't we have both? Frames for moving around large things, and turtles for digging and building. Each has an advantage in its own domain (turtles are faster and consume no resources after construction, but cannot be used as elevators or spaceships).
Also, because the RP control has to be emulated, it might use less resources on its own, but doing the same calculation will require a lot MORE processing in RP then it does in CC, since CC converts over at a much higher logical level. The one and only advantages I see, basically, is them being on after their chunk is reloaded. Other then that, I see no purpose.
I just wish Eloraam had just used DCPU-16 assembly. I am sure a large number of people would be willing to use that. As is, I just don't care enough to learn the silly little details of the assembly language when I can get basically everything I need far far far easier in CC.
34 posts
Location
United States
Posted 29 June 2012 - 03:49 AM
It's easer to make programs in CC than RPC
You can't save programs to RPC computers making the startup process more complicated
In order to start a RPC computer you need a monitor CPU a disk drive and a FORTH disk starting a CC computer just requires a computer
RPC programs are limited by ingame RAM moduals CC programs arn't limited by ingame hardware
Users don't make peripherals for RPC
1 posts
Posted 07 July 2012 - 03:07 AM
RP's microcontroller executes one instruction per tick, while the CC programs run on your computers processor (They are WAY faster).
RP's microcontroller executes one thousand instructions per tick. You'd be hard pressed to come up with a valid minecraft application that requires more than 20 thousand instructions per second. On the plus side, you can't get more than that so a few annoying users on a multiplayer server can't bring the entire world to a crawl with malicious or ignorant coding.
As for Forth, it's not the only option. Given a fully emulated processor, people are encouraged to write their own operating systems and MS-BASIC is an option for RP computers.
That said, RP really could use a monitor block.
496 posts
Location
New Zealand
Posted 07 July 2012 - 04:32 AM
RP's microcontroller executes one instruction per tick, while the CC programs run on your computers processor (They are WAY faster).
RP's microcontroller executes one thousand instructions per tick. You'd be hard pressed to come up with a valid minecraft application that requires more than 20 thousand instructions per second. On the plus side, you can't get more than that so a few annoying users on a multiplayer server can't bring the entire world to a crawl with malicious or ignorant coding.
As for Forth, it's not the only option. Given a fully emulated processor, people are encouraged to write their own operating systems and MS-BASIC is an option for RP computers.
That said, RP really could use a monitor block.
No RP computers process 1 instruction per 1 tick.
445 posts
Posted 07 July 2012 - 10:37 AM
RP's microcontroller executes one instruction per tick, while the CC programs run on your computers processor (They are WAY faster).
RP's microcontroller executes one thousand instructions per tick. You'd be hard pressed to come up with a valid minecraft application that requires more than 20 thousand instructions per second. On the plus side, you can't get more than that so a few annoying users on a multiplayer server can't bring the entire world to a crawl with malicious or ignorant coding.
As for Forth, it's not the only option. Given a fully emulated processor, people are encouraged to write their own operating systems and MS-BASIC is an option for RP computers.
That said, RP really could use a monitor block.
No RP computers process 1 instruction per 1 tick.
The 65EL02 CPU is capable of running 20000 instructions per second in the long term, or 1000 instructions per world tick.
1 posts
Posted 04 January 2013 - 12:59 AM
Hang on. I use both.
ComputerCraft is more oriented towards the look and feel of a home PC. It's helpful for writing locks, messaging software, and the like, but it's useless for controlling redstone, and Lua feels underpowered and slow.
Redpower Control is an emulation of the MOS 6502 within the game, making it a bit different than ComputerCraft. It was added primarily to control things with redstone (hence the name "Control") and uses the FORTH language. However, trying to write things that require a lot of text manipulation is challenging.
Language-wise, it's actually not a big deal. I learned enough FORTH to use Control in about a solid day. It's a very nice language.
2447 posts
Posted 04 January 2013 - 02:35 AM
ComputerCraft isn't useless for controlling redstone - what makes you say that? And Lua isn't slow for CC's purposes. You really think that emulating an entire computer is faster than Lua?
2217 posts
Location
3232235883
Posted 04 January 2013 - 03:03 AM
i like CC better than RPC, i prefer my low level programming to be done on my calculator
i still use it though :3