Subject:
|
Re: Brute Force Brick
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Fri, 5 Mar 2004 01:27:24 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
899 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Steve Hassenplug wrote:
> So, how much would you be willing to pay for one of these?
so you are a real investigator of the kind.
> http://www.hitechnic.com/development_lab.htm
> [Q: How is it programmed?]
> A: The software is set-up much like the RCX. John wrote a compiler that
> converts programs written in "BC" (which is a very old language, that he
> created, I believe) to assembly. These programs run on a kernal (also
> written by John), like BrickOS. We've talked about having firmware that
> could becompatable with the RCX op-codes, but I doubt that will happen
> unless they go into mass-production. But, this would allow people to use
> programs written for an RCX directly on a BFB.
I think, before checking out the market chances of your indeed incredible and
usefull machine, you should make it look like an RCX with expanded sensor and
motor capabilities to us users. This means, that you should adapt the RCX
op-codes as a virtual machine (you know), executing them after compilation of
a well known language, NQC for example. Probably an agreement with Dave Baum
would make it?
Beside the expanded sensor and motor capabilities we need bigger arrays (as
you give us) but the RCX datalog too (at least).
A 38.4kbps UHF radio link is nice, but it disallows us doing Brian Davis pings
if an infrared interface is missing.
Greetings
Ralph
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Brute Force Brick
|
| (...) That's pretty much what I was thinking. (...) Think about the size of the datalog you could record with 1MB of RAM! :) (...) I don't think the hardware's going to change. But the loss of the IR LED is not such a big deal, if you consider all (...) (21 years ago, 5-Mar-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
