 | | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Sunday, May 09, 1999 5:07 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH (...) SENSOR_READ has changed, I think the sense of the result is different 4000 POWER_GET returns (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 8:07 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH (...) Am I doing something wrong here (my FORTH is a bit rusty)? : .VOLTAGE RCX_POWER [ HEX ] 4001 (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 7:07 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH (...) Actually, I thought that anything running interactively (or I suppose more accurately not (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 10:07 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH (...) Well, I'm not in a position that I really need MARKER with the multitasking testing, just a (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 10:13 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH (...) Definately 2 (...) I couldn't see it earlier, but I see now that the voltage in millivolts (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: IR mode
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 6:07 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: IR mode (...) I wonder if these will work? ;---...--- ; IRMODE_HI ( -- ) M_CODE(9,``"IRMODE_H...HI,_SLINK) MOV.W (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 5:07 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH MARKER seems to work, but I haven't tested it much as my debug runs more often end up in a lockup, (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: pbFORTH and MARKER
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, April 22, 1999 7:16 PM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: pbFORTH and MARKER (...) Great news. I don't actually need it yet (or enough). I am stillexperimenting with (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 5:08 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH I have it now, thank you. I've figured out how POWER_GET works, but not the return values. From (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: New pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Saturday, May 01, 1999 12:07 PM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: New pbFORTH (...) Unfortunately my mailer could not decode the MIME attachment. Could you send it UUENCODEd? (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: pbFORTH
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:31 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: pbFORTH (...) Thanks for that, I can't try it until tomorrow because the machine wth the IR tower on is in (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: Ir transmission
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Monday, April 19, 1999 6:07 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: Ir transmission (...) To answer the question, I would say do it as core (quicker download). I think we agree (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: multitasker
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Monday, April 19, 1999 2:31 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: multitasker (...) Excellent news. (...) You can have our SpeedBot as a demo program (as soon as I get it to (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: Ir transmission
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: John Cooper [mailto:robots@jpsc.co.uk] Sent: Monday, April 19, 1999 2:31 AM To: Ralph Hempel Subject: Re: Ir transmission (...) Well, I don't do realtime stuff (until now), in fact what I do (simulation) is almost (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | FW: pbFORTH and MARKER
|
|
-----Original Message----- From: Ralph Hempel [mailto:rhempel@bmts.com] Sent: Thursday, April 22, 1999 12:55 PM To: John Cooper Subject: pbFORTH and MARKER John, I have discovered yet another bug in the CREATE DOES> of pbFORTH and fixed it. Now (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Forward of pbFORTH debug sessions
|
|
John Cooper and I have exchanged numerous emails on the progression of pbFORTH and he has agreed to share them with the group. I guess we should have always discussed on the group, but once I just hit Reply instead of ReplyToAll and that was the end (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Some goals, ideas, etc. for a new bytecode interpreter (long)
|
|
(...) Single-stepping through instructions would be a mode offered by the interpreter, and wouldn't require any breakpoints to be set. I suppose what the debugging information could contain is, instead of a list of valid breakpoints, a list of (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Some goals, ideas, etc. for a new bytecode interpreter (long)
|
|
(...) You have 4 7-segment characters which could display a 4 character text string (albeit with some of the characters being different case and some confusion between characters). (...) Adding limited functions to check the memory usage without (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Some goals, ideas, etc. for a new bytecode interpreter (long)
|
|
(...) Sure, but that's what zero padding is for. Since the opcode is IR-only, you don't care too much about length. The only length restriction comes from the second digit of the opcode, assuming you're using the ROM to receive incoming IR data. (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Some goals, ideas, etc. for a new bytecode interpreter (long)
|
|
(...) I was not intending to limit its functionality to that performed by the RCX with the standard firmware loaded. I did say "when no new features are being exploited". The idea of flashing an identifier associated with the current program may not (...) (25 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
