 | | Re: Another RcxCC revision
|
|
hi John, Fantastic that you released your sources !! That's a good reason for me to try and test your program. I haven't found the time to do it. Also I'll try to compile your sources and look into them. I'll let you know my experiences. (...) met (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Another RcxCC revision
|
|
I just uploaded another revised rcxcc.zip file to my website. (URL) isn't changed significantly from the version I uploaded last night. I cleaned up the source code and removed obsolete references to units that aren't used now that I've abandoned (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: API changes
|
|
I'm actually on my way to my baccalaureate ceremony right now, but I do want to say that I feel very strongly that API changes for the sake of API changes should not be checked in. The current API, while not always intuitive, is well documented and (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC's RCX Communication Code
|
|
(...) You'll need a bunch of files from the rcxlib directory (primarily RCX_Link.cpp, which implements the communication protocol). You'll also need the serial interface code which resides in platform/PSerial_unix.cpp (plus a few include files in (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: API changes
|
|
(...) I don't imagine that these changes will increase memory usage much, since they are largely just re-working existing features. I will look into the memory usage before releasing, though. In fact, I think that after I redid the networking a bit (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | NQC's RCX Communication Code
|
|
Hi- This message is probably only answerable by Dave, but someone else might know the answer. I'm trying to build a GNOME (a linux GUI) application for controlling the RCX, ala the tools menu of RCXcc. Anyway, I wanted to know what files I would (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC vs Spirit communication speed
|
|
(...) I knew Scout didn't support the opcode, but overlooked the Cybermaster case. I'll fix it for NQC as well. The return value for an unsupported opcode doesn't really matter since nothing is going to come back anyway, so predictive will fail no (...) (23 years ago, 12-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC vs Spirit communication speed
|
|
(...) I made PredictReplyLength a member of the RCXLink class so it can return a different value for case 0x20 (it returns 20 if the Target is Cybermaster and 0 if it is Scout - since the Scout doesn't support that opcode). Of course, in Object (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC vs Spirit communication speed
|
|
(...) Correct - dynamic timing is turned off when predictive is being used (which is the default). Predictive is relatively new, and I wasn't sure which code you started with (or how you ported/used it), so that's why I explained the dynamic timing. (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC vs Spirit communication speed
|
|
hi John, I'm curious to see your "Fakespirit" class. At this moment I only need a limit set of commands, so I send by a couple of simple routines to my serial commport driver (indepent thread). Here is the basic code I use, timing is very a stable (...) (23 years ago, 11-May-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
