 | | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) power) and has 64k of memory. How much runtime state can you really process with 64k after the kernel and sensor/motor processes are loaded? Maybe more than I think... Btw, thanks for the document! The current paradigm in RTOS design seems to (...) (20 years ago, 27-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: remote control and rcx
|
|
(...) hey thanks dave hopefully i can run some tests as soon as my new rcx arrives. but i'll give it a shot. i'll be posting any progress so u'll know how it goes LeE (20 years ago, 27-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) I'll add it to my tool belt if it'll run on Linux ;) I certainly don't mean to slight the NXT software (I haven't even played with it yet). I assume it will be quite capable. (...) Indeed. Programming languages are simply tools. They should be (...) (20 years ago, 27-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) Very good point! So one design goal/guiding principle would be try not to break brickOS programs for NXT and provide if nessecary a easy software upgrade path. (...) I would really like to point out (to the general audience) what I see as a (...) (20 years ago, 27-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: What I would do (2)
|
|
(...) I would be in favor of having a port of BrickOS for NXT (instead of having another thing to learn). I'm not gonna throw away my RCXs and I would prefer having similar languages for both bricks. Yes programmers would need to know the nuances (...) (20 years ago, 26-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)
|
