 | | Re: NQC 2.2 a1 available for public test
|
|
Matthew Miller schreef: (...) Excellent work! With this release the firmware download finally works for me without errors :-) (...) It might be nice indeed, but with installing NQC 2.2 final it would have be able to delete both 2.1r2 and 2.2a (not (...) (24 years ago, 6-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.2 a1 available for public test
|
|
(...) Linux build / RPMs available from (URL). I haven't updated the man page yet but will work on that soon. Q: would it be worthwhile to construct the alpha (and even beta?) RPMs such that they can coexist on the same machine with the stable (...) (24 years ago, 6-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC 2.2 a1 available for public test
|
|
Preliminary NQC support for RCX 2.0 is now available in NQC version 2.2a1. Its in the beta test area of the NQC site: (URL) have been a lot of changes internal to the compiler itself, and RCX 2.0 support is only partially complete at the moment, but (...) (24 years ago, 6-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc) !
|
| |
| | Re: How much RAM is left?
|
|
(...) Pfff. As if that could possibly be important. If it isn't an object-oriented client-server architecture in Java++, it can't be serious :-) (...) If I read the source correctly, memory is allocated sequentially, and in my image I've got SOURCE (...) (24 years ago, 5-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: How much RAM is left?
|
|
(...) Nope, the memory is allocated linearly from the end of the image. The current image size is 12 or 13K. New dictionary entries and ALLOTed memory are interspersed as they occur. NOTE WELL that there is a subtle bug in the RCX ROM routines when (...) (24 years ago, 5-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | How much RAM is left?
|
|
(...) I believe that. 32k of RAM is a luxury for forth. That's another thing people don't generally understand about forth, they way it effectively compresses runtime software. I've heard of ram reductions of a factor of 5-10 for forth when compared (...) (24 years ago, 5-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Has anyone used lnpd succesfully?
|
|
(...) Of course, but also currently not very available. But i still would like to fix this problem, or at least find the reason. Sporadically, i'm working or better say thinking about an enhanced version of lnpd, but i think this doesn't make much (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | RE: Which terminal on Linux? plus random thoughts.
|
|
(...) Umm, I mean cover the tower and the RCX with a box.... :-) (...) No, Ernst's idea has a preamble byte for the transfer, and then the RCX grabs all of the chars and sums them. If the sum is wrong, then it NAKs the packet and the host sends it (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Which terminal on Linux? plus random thoughts.
|
|
(...) I missed that. What do you mean by simply covered. (...) No surprise there. I implemented XMODEM a long time ago on a spectrometer. I don't remember the details but obviously it stayed with me. Besides all protocols tend to look the same at (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: Which terminal on Linux? plus random thoughts.
|
|
(...) I have beta quality Tcl code that sends an SRECORD firmware imge up to the RCX (fast or slow) and has basic terminal capabilities. It also strips comments and whitespace out of files as they are uploaded to reduce the time. I'd like to put a (...) (24 years ago, 4-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
