Subject:
|
Re: RCX Programming Questions and Sensor Ideas
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 11 Nov 1998 07:33:01 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Peter Hesketh <pbh@phesk.demon.^stopspammers^co.uk>
|
Viewed:
|
5728 times
|
| |
|
|
In article <199811102221.OAA07133@pixel.Stanford.EDU>, Kekoa Proudfoot
<kekoa@Graphics.Stanford.EDU> quotes and writes
> > An example. Say you want to prevent two tasks
> > from fighting over motor 1.
> This assumes that the check and the set are, together, atomic.
You are right, of course.
> 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.
If it does I haven't found it.
--
Regards - Peter Hesketh, Mynyddbach, Mon.
Forty reasons why a dog is better than a woman: number 6
"Dogs don't expect you to call when you are running late."
|
|
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 (28 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
|
|
|
|
