 | | Re: FSMs, coding techniques and other goodies
|
|
Vlad, why don't you write a graphical FSM generator? Textbook FSMs are quite powerful, but in practice, states and transitions are usually augmented with enter/hold/leave actions. This provides plenty of configuration potential. Also, there's a (...) (25 years ago, 14-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | How did you made nqc?
|
|
Hello ! Being a fervent user of NQC, (thanks mr Baum!) I'm asking myself how nqc has been made. I know it's a very complex topic, but some explication for non programming-specialists could be very interesting. And because the rcx has quite limited (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | ROBOLAB and OS 9
|
|
Some people have been reporting an "Error of Type II" when they try to install ROBOLAB onto a machine with OS9. The temporary solution for now is to copy the contents of the CD-ROM onto your desktop and install from the desktop and not the CD-ROM. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab)
|
| |
| | Re: legOS applications
|
|
(...) Yes, that's exactly how it works. Markus. (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | legOS applications
|
|
Hi! I might have misunderstood things, so please forgive if this is a question that should not have been asked... The "dynamic loading of programs and modules" feature in legOS 0.2.x - does it mean one can download the kernel once, and then the (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
