To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 434
433  |  435
Subject: 
Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Tue, 10 Nov 1998 23:50:45 GMT
Viewed: 
2645 times
  

An example.  Say you want to prevent two tasks from fighting over motor
1.  Just insert an instruction in each task before operating the motor
to check that var 31 contains zero.  If it does, set var 31 to 1 and
control the motor, then set var 31 to 0 again.  If a task sees var 31 is
non-zero then you can program it to wait or abort as you wish.

Kekoa Proudfoot wrote:
This assumes that the check and the set are, together, atomic.  Does the
SDK document describe what if/why this might be atomic?  I haven't had a
chance to read it in enough detail to find this answer for myself.

...and it would be my sincerest recommendation that you NOT read it,
Kekoa.  It would be safer from the reverse-engineering standpoint that
you NOT use this SDK in any manner.

*I* can read it, though <g>, and I can find nothing that indicates a
"safe" way to implement semaphores.

Unfortunately, during my quick scan, I caught three typos/misusage
items (one we knew about before, where all the error codes use "TO_"
instead of "TOO_"), which detracts from the otherwise high quality of
LEGO products.  :-(

-- joshua



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
 
(...) Check and set do not have to be atomic, they have to be ordered. The sequence is: Check all flags, when clear, set our flag, check all flags again, if only ours is set, do stuff. 1. You can dedicate a task to managing semaphores. I described (...) (26 years ago, 11-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)
  Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
 
In message <3648D155.FF4306@alu...ucsc.edu>, Joshua Delahunty <lugnet.robotics@lugnet.com> writes (...) RECEIVED is spelt wrong in the Spirit.OCX software too. :-) I would like to add though that I was impressed with the high quality of the manual. (26 years ago, 11-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
 
(...) This assumes that the check and the set are, together, atomic. Does the SDK document describe what if/why this might be atomic? I haven't had a chance to read it in enough detail to find this answer for myself. -Kekoa (26 years ago, 10-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)

17 Messages in This Thread:






Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR