 | | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Dave Baum schreef: (...) This looks a bit confusing, the alternative looks more logical to me. (...) Now this I can understand :-) Looks awesome. (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
(...) Handling a range should't be too tough - perhaps like this #pragma start [count] where count is assumed to be 1 if not present // reserve location 1 #pragma 1 // reserve locations 5,6 and 7 #pragma 5 3 --- The alternative would be #pragma (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
Dave Baum schreef: (...) It looks perfectly logical to me. Will it be possible to reserve a range or do we need to reserve each location separately? No need for an extra keyword indeed. (It's hard enough already. Well I guess part of that comes from (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Syntax for reserving variables in NQC?
|
|
The fact that in RCX2 the counters are overlapped with global variables has brought about an interesting problem. How should a programmer indicate to the NQC compiler that a certain RCX variable location is to be left untouched (not assigned to any (...) (24 years ago, 28-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Differences between RCX 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0?
|
|
(...) From what I've gathered: 1.0 to 1.5 Removed the power adapter board. Less components on the board. 1.0 to 2.0 from what I gathered a slightly newer board with a 32k ROM instead of the 16K in the 1.0. (The 1.0 is designed to hold a 32k ROM. As (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Tell your robot what to do!
|
|
I don't know if you could use this with Mindstorms or not (I would assume you could) but it sure sounds cool! It's a voice recognition module.... I wonder how hard it would be to assemble and use. It's $50 too.... I don't want to be the guinea (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Can you still use RCX's IR for collision detection?
|
|
I made robot using NQC that did this....pretty reliably too. The idea is you constantly send out messages, and when you get close to an object, there's a bit of feedback. This feedback is picked up by one of the light sensors, which is particularly (...) (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Differences between RCX 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0?
|
|
I've been away from the Mindstorms scene for almost a year....got a bit behind! *grin* Matt (24 years ago, 26-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: winlegos and sort
|
|
Oh never mind. I guess that's what you get for not paying attention to your path. It executed the wrong sort. Torkel Torkel Niklasson <torkel.niklasson@te...logic.com> wrote in message news:Fv4DJ7.Fx6@lugnet.com... (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | winlegos and sort
|
|
I'm having a problem recompiling legos firmware on windows NT. When I try, sort fails, for some reason, and that apparently corrupts the entire legos.srec, and the files that are needed to compile user programs. This is what it says... (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: GA in RCX
|
|
(...) I like the multiple robot idea. If each robot used a simulated annealing algorithm instead of a GA this would require less computation since it would be working on one chromosome instead of a population. Each robot could advertise its fitness (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC and rcx2
|
|
(...) No doc yet. It probably won't happen for a while. There are still features that need to be implemented! Dave (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC and rcx2
|
|
(...) Documentation is always the last thing to get done.... Until I get it completed, your best bet is to read the lego documentation - especially the opcodes monel,monex,monal, and monax. The monitor/catch works like this: monitor(events) { // (...) (24 years ago, 25-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | LCD_NUMBER, made it work.
|
|
(...) I got it finally after re-reading the doc a few times. My arguements were in the wrong order. (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | LCD_NUMBER, Can't make it work.
|
|
The following has no effect: HEX 3002 301F 22 LCD_NUMBER LCD_REFRESH The following do as expected: LCD_4TH LCD_REFRESH LCD_CLEAR LCD_REFRESH Am I missing something? I've tried a few other things with LCD_NUMBER. Once I got 9999 on the display (that (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: grasshopper learns new tricks
|
|
(...) Considering that it has been almost 20 years from my first attempt you should rather say "about time." CREATE DOES> is important to me because it is sort of a minimalist object creator in the sense that it allows the creation of classes of (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: grasshopper learns new tricks
|
|
(...) Phew, it pushes most people over the edge of sanity.... (...) But the dew is still fresh on the grass, young apprentice, and the hot sun may yet inflict harm to you in unexpected ways... Cheers, Ralph Hempel - P.Eng ---...--- Check out pbFORTH (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | grasshopper learns new tricks
|
|
CREATE DOES>, VALUE and EVALUATE. Thank's guys. These will all enhance my code. I knew about CREATE DOES> but never really understood it. Your description pushed me finally over the edge of basic comprehension. EVALUATE is really cool and VALUE is (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | CONSTANTS and VALUES in pbForth
|
|
(...) There are a couple of things in this note. One is an introduction to CREATE DOES> and the other is a solution to your actual problem. Basically, what CREATE DOES> does is separate the run-time and compile time semantics of a word. This is (...) (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Forth question
|
|
(...) You might want to try : zzz S" CONSTANT ONE" EVALUATE ; 1 zzz (...) I think VALUE can be used for that. Ernst (24 years ago, 24-May-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
