 | | Interactive C for the RCX?
|
|
Hi again! I was looking at the Handyboard, and thought whether it would be possible to port IC to the RCX. In my humble opinion, it would fit nicely between legOS and pbForth: the power of C and the interactivity of Forth; no fuss with egcs and gcc (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | FSMs, coding techniques and other goodies
|
|
Hi all! I know that multitasking is reducing the need for using FSMs, but in my case the tasks ended being smaller FSMs after all, and because some parts were overlapping - why not use a single large FSM? [maybe it is my own fault that FSMs appear (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | RIS 1.0 Sightings
|
|
If anyone is wanting them, I'm still seeing RIS 1.0 systems with the 'upgrade to 1.5' sticker on them at most the local Best Buys in NE Kansas (IE Topeka and Overland Park Areas) Tom (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP congestion avoidance improved
|
|
Great! While it is too late for the class I'm helping out with, and it currently looks like it won't be offered again, I'm still looking forward to playing with this in the spring. Thanks so much for the time invested, Martin- Luis (...) ###...### (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | LNP congestion avoidance improved
|
|
Hi there, on my way to a reliable LNP layer (and gdb, hopefully), i did some tests about how well LNP congestion avoidance works: I compiled 2 functionally identical programs, one on my linux-box, one on my RCX. Both of them setup an adressing (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RIS 1.0 vs 1.5: which more "desirable"?
|
|
(...) Sorry, should have said the command console, which does use the VB stuff, and also (of course), sending anything yourself from VB... (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RIS 1.0 vs 1.5: which more "desirable"?
|
|
(...) That's not true. Neither NQC nor LegOS require any vbx files. (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
Dave, I like the idea of teaching how to solve certain problems both with multiple threads and with a Finite State Machine. Adding "switch" would be great! Personally I think that a plain 'C' FSM using switch can be made to look very clear if (...) (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RIS 1.0 vs 1.5: which more "desirable"?
|
|
(...) The problem is that 1.5, does not have the vbx file to allow these to work. You have to get this from a version 1 system. (...) 1.5, adds quite a few useful pieces, but loses a few others. Having '1' upgraded, gives you the best of both (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) FSMs are a boon in our behavioural robotics projects. If you have read the Rod Brooks papers, he uses them to implement subsumptive architectures in his "radical" robots. I have used them a LOT in my Stamp II robots as the only (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
(...) Adding a switch statement to NQC would certainly help make implementation easier...I'll see if I can work it into the next release. Actually, I've been somewhat surprised by the general lack of needing FSMs in my own Mindstorms programming. I (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | firmdl3 doesn't work
|
|
firmdl3 doesn't work for me. Normally the rcx shows numbers up to 24 or 48, then counts back up very quickly, then after a while the program quits.There was only once where it might've worked. I also tried slow, but that stops right after mode=slow. (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
Vlad, The Finite State Machine is a good subject for people to consider in robotics, especially in coding the typical 'looping forever' Rcx applications. Lots of regular 'C' FSM's are implemented with a State variable and "switch" statements, or (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.2 on Win95 (almost)
|
|
That's exactly what i did: egcs 1.1.2 with Mumit Khan's patches for windows and Markus' patch for enhanced RCX interrupt support. I'll get instructions on getting LegOS 0.2.2 to work on Win95, along with a binary of the compiler and the diffs for (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.2 on Win95 (almost)
|
|
No! No! I mean, yes, do try it again (someone), just not with 2.9.5- there have been reported problems with 2.9.5's treatment of assembler. Rebuild it with 1.1.2 + patch- that is known to work. Then let me know- I'll host it for you. -Luis (...) (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.2 on Win95
|
|
Well, in the meantime, i built one on WinNT. The build always failed on Win95. Tried Canadian cross on Linux and i too gave up in frustration. But now that i have one built, i'll put it up on a webpage tomorrow. First, i'm gonna check the files it (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | chaning the host address in LNP
|
|
OK. The initial stuff I have done with the Java interface to LNP just addresses different "ports" to the host address 0. Each of the RCX's on the Lego Network Protocol network had host addredss 0 and port 1,2,3,4 depending on which brick they were (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.2 on Win95 (almost)
|
|
Peter Van der Beken wrote in message ... [snip] (...) from (...) . Yes, the compiler I built doesn't have the patch - it's also egcs 1.1.2 rather than gcc-2.95.2. This isn't going to change quickly because unfortunately I don't have access to a (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP collision detection Bug found and fixed
|
|
(...) it is already defined this way... indeed it looks like egcs for h8300 treats char as unsigned by default. look at the following test proggy... char ch; void showbug(void) { if (ch < 1) ch=-2; } ... and the disassembled code (...) (...) (25 years ago, 10-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: "No reply from RCX" with nqc...
|
|
(...) thank you (and bob fay) for your two responses. i have a sneaking suspicion that bob was right on with the curious battery problem. i opened my tower battery case and "re-seated" the battery. (and i confirmed it *was* in the proper (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
