 | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —John Barnes
|
| | | (...) I like using NQC because of the simplicity of downloading byte code based programs onto the Lego firmware environment. Using NQC, the CPU would need to be at least 10x to 100x faster to run the kind of programs I would like to run at an (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Chris Phillips
|
| | | | (...) This could be addressed on the existing hardware with a better programming environment. What I have in mind is a new NQC compiler that generates a firmware file instead of a bytecode file. So you would code in NQC (or something like it) and (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —John Barnes
|
| | | | | (...) Are you sure? How many square inches are there in a 1600 square foot house? I don't think the resulting map array will fit in 32k memory. JB (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Chris Phillips
|
| | | | | | | (...) There are 230,400 square inches in a 1,600 sq-ft house. But you are assuming that you cannot somehow compress the information that you are trying to store. How many chair legs are in your house? Store the location and size of every obstruction (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —John Barnes
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I was using the chair leg as an example. I want to wander around ticking off square inches as I encounter them as navigable or not. I don't want to spend my life trying to develop fancy ways of representing inch square "occupiedness" by any (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Mark Riley
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) Hmm... I think all Chris was trying to say is that there are software techniques that could make your task doable with the current RCX. I know as a programmer, I always try to seek software solutions that maximize the hardware available. Other (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Rob Hendrix
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) off (...) spend my (...) "occupiedness" by (...) byte (...) then I (...) a (...) my (...) job (...) concentrate (...) is to (...) right (...) one (...) memory (...) John and Chris: If there are 8 bits in a byte, 1024 bytes in a kilobyte, and (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Steve Hassenplug
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Still, no one's been able to convince me that the RCX needs more speed or memory. I can see the desire to map a room, but given the building materials, I think very few, if any, builders would be able to even build a LEGO robot that can (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Mark Tarrabain
|
| | | | | | (...) Two words... "sparse array" The cpu in the RCX is plenty fast enough to handle the proccessing overhead incurred in accessing such an array. To work out how much space in such an array your house would require, add the perimeters measured in (...) (21 years ago, 6-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Jordan Bradford
|
| | | | (...) I believe that is exactly what legOS does. It compiles your program and stores it in the firmware area. legOS has no firmware, and it ignores the ROM code, too. It accesses all the hardware directly. That's my understanding, at least. (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: More Speed? Re: Mindstorms 3.0 Wish List —Chris Phillips
|
| | | | (...) Your understanding is correct. So why doesn't everybody use BrickOS? There are at least two reasons that I am aware of: 1. Many people, especially "non-programmers" find a full-blown C++ implementation to be intimidating and non-user-friendly. (...) (21 years ago, 5-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
