Subject:
|
Re: Ultimate ROBOLAB
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:18:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1335 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, John Hansen wrote:
> snip
> I think Ultimate Robolab sounds very cool. Unfortunately, I think some Robolab
> users may be confused by the name and think that their Robolab programs will be
> completely reuseable in Ultimate Robolab. As far as I can figure this is simply
> not the case.
Yes and no! In fact, the name Ultimate ROBOLAB was chosen together with the
father of ROBOLAB Prof Chris Rogers. This might be a bit confusing as to
compatibility. But compatibility there is: 1. Most of the "modifiers" like "Red
Container","Value of Battery","Random number" or "Sample time" etc can be used
with ultimate ROBOLAB; 2. Ultimate ROBOLAB datalogging may be uploaded and
processed with the standard tools; 3. Ultimate must be seen as a kind of ROBOLAB
dialect; 4. Ultimate could be integrated like the "Control Lab" or the "Scout"
tools.
>
> The entire API of Robolab is geared toward the standard RCX/Scout firmware which
> is not present when you are using Ultimate Robolab. Ultimate Robolab looks like
> it is probably akin to brickOS or Quite C which are very similar to NQC in many
> ways but which have a somewhat different API for accessing the RCX inputs and
> outputs. That means you can't take an NQC program and compile it for brickOS or
> Quite C. With the right preprocessor macros, custom header files, and a really
> simple NQC program you might be able get it to work. My guess is that
> non-trivial Robolab programs will face similar challenges if you tried to use
> them in Ultimate Robolab.
This is a good comparison: Ultimate ROBOLAB is to ROBOLAB, what brickOS is to
nqc. But we have more, since Ultimate ROBOLAB entirely runs on the ROBOLAB
platform.
>
> Perhaps my lack of experience with Robolab is giving me the wrong impression.
> Am I right Robolab vs Ultimate Robolab? Will Robolab users be able to reuse
> their existing LEGO programs (as Jerry asks above) in Ultimate Robolab?
No, but this is an interesting suggestion, to allow existing programs to be
converted into Ultimate. I'll think about it.
> The Ultimate Robolab info page says this:
>
> "compatible with standard firmware opcodes 0x10 (ping), 0x63 (uploadRAM),
> 0xA4(uploadDatalog)... "
>
> I'm wondering what the "..." means. It sounds almost as if the base firmware
> code used in Ultimate Robolab supports more standard firmware opcodes than the
> three listed. Support for some of the standard firmware opcodes is something
> I've long hoped would be added to brickOS.
>
> John Hansen
In fact, there are a few other opcodes: 0xD2 (remote..), 0xF7 (sendMessage),
0x14 (Setvar), 0x12 (Poll) that are present in the kernel. But, advanced users
easily may setup their own opcode set with Ultimate. They only must respect the
correct number of parameters. And nothing prevents us from adding anything to
the basic kernel. The principal gain here is that the user can define things
himself. NOTE for beta-testers: Have a look into "Opcode-Manager" in "deep
loch".
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Ultimate ROBOLAB
|
| (...) I think Ultimate Robolab sounds very cool. Unfortunately, I think some Robolab users may be confused by the name and think that their Robolab programs will be completely reuseable in Ultimate Robolab. As far as I can figure this is simply not (...) (20 years ago, 12-Dec-04, to lugnet.robotics)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
