 | | IR problems
|
|
Hi, I was having some problems in a program I'm writing in PbForth and it seems that it could be related to the way I communicate thru IR. I use the Lego remote control. I joined the following code to demonstrate. I use the word 'getHeader' from (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: IR Tower and Hyperthreading
|
|
(...) It depends: I would not consider it "illegal" :-) :-) :-) I'm a developer myself and love to work in this kind of environment - when one has control over things and understands exactly what is happening. (as opposed to, say, the Windows (...) (22 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The end of an all-too-brief era
|
|
(...) How well informed is this guy at Toys R Us? If Toys R Us doesn't want to sell the high dollar Mindstorms 2.0 set, they can simply stop buying it--which means that Toys R Us is discontinuing the purchase. Depending on the competence of the Toys (...) (22 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | ...2 years later... :-) (was: newbie again part 2)
|
|
Hello All, In lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, Dave Baum wrote (almost two years ago, Thu, 17 Jan 2002 00:34:56 GMT -- your words are cherished, Dave! :-): (...) [...] (...) Well, I am not (yet) a Java programmer, but try to become one, and would like to (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC for sale?
|
|
(...) Personally, I am a tiny bit annoyed by this $99 CD-ROM tutorial. Caveat: I haven't seen the actual CD or any accompanying documentation. My slight annoyance is based solely on having looked at the preview on the web. I don't recall ever having (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The end of an all-too-brief era
|
|
(...) I think the problem there is that LEGO can't or doesn't want to get involved in the level of support that it often takes to sell into the educational channel effectively. James (URL) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC for sale?
|
|
(...) In all their sample code they post this little blurb, "Click here for code you can copy into a BricxCC file." James (URL) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementation of Installable Timers
|
|
Iain McInnes wrote: [snip] (...) Great idea! (...) In your implementation, would it be possible for the client task to be killed (in the case of a run-away task)... causing the struct to be deallocated... while the struct is still in the linked (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Points to: 'Implementation of Installable Timers'
|
|
Hi, ppl. I posted this one in the wrong place :0 (URL) Enjoy ! Iain. (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Points to 'Design by Contract'
|
|
Hi, Folks, I posted some stuff on an assert() macro - in the wrong place - (D'oH). The thread is here: (URL) Enjoy ! Iain. (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) I agree it seems to be the wrong way round. That's the standard implementation. NDEBUG seems to stand for "No debug". One advantage of making it negative, is that you get the assert()s if you don't do anything (ie dont define NDEBUG). BTW, (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) D'oH! Thanks, Tim. I was very careful composing the original post, but added the example in as an after thought - Well spotted. Iain. (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | RE: NQC's future
|
|
(...) Ha Ha, very funny :-) Seriously, Philippe, why not give pbForth a try? I know that NQC works great on both the Spybots and the RCX, and even Cybermaster. But if you're looking for speed, higher precision, lots of variables and generally more (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC's future
|
|
(...) Something I'd like to see implemented in NQC is a mixed-mode multiply/divide, similar to the */ operator in Forth, with an intermediary 32bits product. That would greatly ease precision calculations without requiring major structural (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics)
|
| |
| | RE: IR Tower and Hyperthreading
|
|
<SNIP> (...) It should be illegal to use "Linux" and "straight forward" in the same sentence. Notice, everything after that line uses words like "scattered", "most helpful", "other flavors", "to be added to the kernel [in upcoming release]", and (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: nop in NQC?
|
|
(...) Doh! Now I really feel sheepish. Please forgive my public display of idiocy. John Hansen (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) <delurk> The first definition of assert is the correct, standard definition. However there is a slight boo boo in the original post in the line: assert (myptr = malloc (sizeof (mystruct)); Which will delete the malloc when NDEBUG is defined. (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | USB Tower range
|
|
Hi, I recently bought the RCX2.0 and I am a little disappointed at the range for the USB tower. Though configured to be at long range I doubt I can implement a range greater then 5 or 6 feet. Is this normal.? Am I missing something.? Paul Reedman (22 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: IR Tower and Hyperthreading
|
|
(...) Thanks a lot for the tips. I'm will definitely use the CVS version myself. Thanks again, Jean (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: The end of an all-too-brief era
|
|
(...) line is alive and they have plans for it, and at that moment I felt satisfied. The day after my brother Giulio met Brad again along the corridors of the LEGOWORLD and asked him a few more questions. Shortly, Brad confirmed that Mindstorms has (...) (22 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
