Subject:
|
Re: Programming the RCX...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Apr 2001 02:54:21 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Steve Baker <SJBAKER1@nospamAIRMAIL.NET>
|
Reply-To:
|
sjbaker1@airmailSTOPSPAM.net
|
Viewed:
|
815 times
|
| |
|
|
"Michael F. Aube" wrote:
> Thanks for the reply. I was thinking more along the lines of abstraction
> and simplification versus a pure visual language.
Ah - OK.
> Something that would
> make programming an RCX alot easier with respect to range checking for
> valid values, such as motor numbers or valid speeds/angles of rotation,
> etc. It all goes along with what Object-Oriented Programming is supposed
> to bring to the table (assuming you can model the problem in a decent
> way).
I think that might just be overkill for a system as simple as the RCX.
There are only three motor outputs - and you have no direct control over
speed or angles - you can only say "forwards", "reverse", "brake" or
"freewheel" with a 0->7 power level control that may or may not make
an actual difference to your robot depending on how hard the motor
has to work. It's hard to see how any more sophistication is possible.
Motors tend not to be addressed with variables - you generally refer to
them by enumeration...so range checking is largely just a waste of valuable
CPU time.
Similar comments apply to sensors....especially things like light and
angle sensors that tend to be 'fuzzy' in their responses to the environment.
Object-oriented programming (under C++) is already possible using LegOS
and g++...but in the end, there isn't all that much RAM on board - so
the system is inherently rather limiting.
I don't think that more layers of software sophistication is actually
needed.
What *is* needed (and *badly* IMHO) is a more extensible computing
resource than the RCX. The limitation on numbers of sensors and
motors really is a terrible restriction in many applications.
--
Steve Baker HomeEmail: <sjbaker1@airmail.net>
WorkEmail: <sjbaker@link.com>
HomePage : http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
Projects : http://plib.sourceforge.net
http://tuxaqfh.sourceforge.net
http://tuxkart.sourceforge.net
http://prettypoly.sourceforge.net
http://freeglut.sourceforge.net
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Programming the RCX...
|
| Steve, Thanks for the reply. I was thinking more along the lines of abstraction and simplification versus a pure visual language. Something that would make programming an RCX alot easier with respect to range checking for valid values, such as motor (...) (23 years ago, 9-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
12 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
