 | | RE: Handy Board software
|
|
(...) They're both really decent 8bit micros. Similar IO capabilities, and I think the HC11 has better timers, but only 8 bit A/D. I've worked a LOT with the HC11 and it's really a good part. (...) Beleive it or not, there is a FORTH for the HC11 (...) (25 years ago, 9-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Handy Board software
|
|
(...) They're both 8-bit microcontrollers with a roughly similar set of peripheral functions (timer, ACD, serial port, etc). But the similarity ends there. The programming model for the H8 is compltely different from the 68xx series. (...) I don't (...) (25 years ago, 9-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Handy Board software
|
|
Over the past few months, I've been reading with great interest many of the exciting things people here have written about the Handy Board... (10 URLs) I'm really starting to think that one of these would be a great addition to my LEGO collection. (...) (25 years ago, 9-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: egcs download problem
|
|
I got it from luis' site, but the version there doesn't support c++, and legos needs c++, doesn't it? John Bauman wrote in message ... (...) compiler (...) (25 years ago, 8-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | egcs download problem
|
|
Has anyone else had this problem?I went to download the linux egcs compiler from the legOS site.I downloaded right, but it only downloaded ~2 megs, while the page said it was supposed to download ~3megs. Later, when i tried to bunzip(with bunzip2, (...) (25 years ago, 7-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 ready for beta test
|
|
(...) The topic comes up from time to time. I'm *way* too busy with other projects to extend the firmware, but if someone else wanted to, I'd be willing to extend NQC as needed. If someone else is seriously interested in taking on this work, please (...) (25 years ago, 7-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 ready for beta test
|
|
NQC seems perfect right now, thanks ! But well, now nqc has all the features suported by the original rcx firmware, it should be very interesting to modify the existing firmware, in order to add new features, but still keeping ease of use of NQC. I (...) (25 years ago, 7-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: How do you convert light sensor data to bmp image
|
|
What could very exiting is to create a win32 software with spirit.ocx which could display in realtime the image on your screen... I'll work at it when i'll get the mindstorm... ---...--- Philippe Jadin mailto:philippe.jadin@skynet.be Belgium, Europe (...) (25 years ago, 6-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC 2.0 ready for beta test
|
|
See the "beta testing" section of the NQC site: (URL) documentation is still somewhat minimal, but it should be enough for people to get started. Dave Baum (25 years ago, 6-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP - lets get coding.
|
|
(...) Regarding where to go from here, if you step up to do the coding, I believe where to go is up to you. I don't know if that is how it usually works, but I certainly wouldn't want to be coding up something I am not happy with, so I would expect (...) (25 years ago, 1-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP - lets get coding.
|
|
(...) I have just grabbed a copy - will have a look! Where do you suggest we go from here? I'm up for creating an initial API and getting some code cut (Within my limits - I know little/nothing about Linux & MacOS, and as yes LegOS). However, I'm (...) (25 years ago, 1-Aug-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP - lets get coding.
|
|
(...) No, you didn't - I just didn't wanted to make sure I wasn't :) (...) This has already been done, for Librcx at least; don't know if anybody took a look at the code I put at: (URL) mentioned wanting to maybe take a look at that; porting to (...) (25 years ago, 31-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | LNP - lets get coding.
|
|
(...) Hi, Didn't mean to come across as arguing - sorry if I did! As you say, lets get coding LNP (My assumption is that the coding bit hasn't started yet, if it has, please accept my apologies & let me know how it is going!). I guess the things (...) (25 years ago, 31-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | emulegOS: quick bug fixes
|
|
I received this message by Mark Falco: (...) The site is now updated and emulegOS_unix.zip contains the new patched versions of ir-rover.cpp and irclient.tcl. The URL is: (URL) Mark Mario (URL) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | RE: LNP Repost
|
|
(...) I think Kekoa means that we should calculate the CRC16 and use only the high byte in the message, to save space. If we then tag the low byte on later, the old code expecting only the high byte won't break.... Cheers, Ralph Hempel - P.Eng (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost
|
|
(...) I'm not sure you can construct a sensible CRC16 that has a CRC8 as one byte. Cheers, Ben. -- (URL) grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first (...) (25 years ago, 30-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost (Me banging on about checksums)
|
|
(...) You will miss about 1 in 256 errors that you do not catch earlier using collision detection. I think your error rate per message will be much less than 1 in 256 if you (can?) get the collision detection code right. But we shouldn't argue the (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LNP Repost (Me banging on about checksums)
|
|
(...) With much respect, I would suggest that CRC8 is probably not sufficient, especially if we go for a broadcast (Ethernet) solution, where lots of collisions, and hence errors, will probably occur - with CRC8 you will probably miss about 1 in 256 (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: New pbFORTH 106 release
|
|
Hi Ralph, Thanks for the new release. I have a couple of questions: 1. How do I use BUTTON_GET? The documentation says it just expects to find an address on the stack, but I get this: RCX_BUTTON BUTTON_GET BUTTON_GET ? stack underflow 2. What (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: rcxhttpd?
|
|
I love the idea, I think it would be great to see hundreds of little bots whizzing round my house comunicating with each other. Its a bit like teaching your dog to fetch the morning mail. Alan Bell. (...) (25 years ago, 29-Jul-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
