 | | Re: Aborting from ISR
|
|
Hi, (...) Yup, that does what I want, although I can't remember enough about forth internals to work out why it works. But it does seem to depend on the return stack having a particular structure, so I do wonder - what happens if the interrupt (...) (22 years ago, 20-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: XP vs USB Tower and BrixCC
|
|
"Bob Fay" <rfay@attbi.com> wrote in message news:GzIyn4.71H@lugnet.com... (...) Now this is blowing my mind. If I open two applications of Brixcc, the second works fine with the tower. The first will not turn on the tower. Arg! -- Bob Fay THE SHOP (...) (22 years ago, 20-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: XP vs USB Tower and BrixCC
|
|
"Rob Doucette" <lego@nospam.doucettenet.com> wrote in message news:GzIx1o.3wL@lugnet.com... (...) mine (...) will check it again. (...) (22 years ago, 20-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: XP vs USB Tower and BrixCC
|
|
(...) Have you tried installing the SDK 2.0? (URL) had to do that on my W2K laptop in order to get the USB Tower to work. -Rob. (22 years ago, 20-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | XP vs USB Tower and BrixCC
|
|
Does BrixCC support the USB tower in Windows XP? I cannot seem to make mine work. I have reinstalled the program, but to no avail. Any ideas? -- Bob Fay THE SHOP (URL) (22 years ago, 20-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Re: Scheduler patch
|
|
Nice to see that someone is so involved in BrickOS like you are. Just don't go dissapear. /Joel (22 years ago, 19-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | *** legOS new name: And the winner is... ***
|
|
It is over now. There is a clear winner. The votes with the following phrases for osmOS are as follows: Too late for brickfest obscured by clouds since the open source alchemie... lbDPL cos' the brick is thick fischkopp more things considered next (...) (22 years ago, 18-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | RE: Aborting from ISR
|
|
(...) Alex, I'll have a good look at this and then post an article. I have a funny feeling you're doing it the hard way, but that's because I know the insides of the patient better than you do - I am Dr Frankenforth after all! Oh, and sorry for the (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: Lazy newbieish question
|
|
(...) Matt, I see this all the time when I teach embedded C programming to desktop guys - it's an objectification of things at the wrong level. Maybe you could consider this: (setup-light-sensor 'PORT2) which expands to 3 1 SENSOR_TYPE 128 1 (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Lazy newbieish question
|
|
If I wasn't in a hurry with so many things to do in the next two days, I would figure this out for myself. My apologies for such a simple question. We're wrapping a lot sensor input stuff at a higher level of abstraction than the raw pbForth words. (...) (22 years ago, 17-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Aborting from ISR
|
|
It works! (after countless crashes and firmwire reloads that is ... :) By modifying the saved Instruction Pointer to point to a memory area which in turn contains the address of an "abort word", on the next execution of a word (either inside a (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: is it possible to remove lnp_handler while running ?
|
|
Have you tried the 0.2.6.05 ?? I remember something in this area while I was debugging RCX message passing. There is a different semaphone for the xmit buffer separate from the transmitter (TX) in 0.2.6.05 that was not so in 0.2.6 The very latest (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: is it possible to remove lnp_handler while running ?
|
|
no..wait.. im fairly sertain that i did have a context shift while in lnp_addressing_write..after all .could that be why it never returns ? Falco, i tried looking at your thread safe example in emulegos, but im afraid i didnt understand much of (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Lejos discussion archives
|
|
(...) Hi Jürgen Thanks for the link. It is not only up to date, but the search function actually works. Perhaps the lejos.sourceforge.net web site could be modified to use it instead of Geocrawler. Roger (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
| |
| | Re: is it possible to remove lnp_handler while running ?
|
|
heh.. tried that.. no luck :( sigh..after yet a couple of hours trying to figgure this out, im 99,99% sure that the problem is in lnp_addressing_write. could this be that the function is not thread safe ? but then again i have protected the function (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Lejos discussion archives
|
|
(...) Could be, I see the same. (...) I don't think so. You could use the sourceforge archive at (URL) Jürgen Stuber <stuber@loria.fr> (URL) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
| |
| | Re: is it possible to remove lnp_handler while running ?
|
|
"kenneth johansen" <kennethj@stud.cs.uit.no> wrote in message news:3D343FAA.172476....uit.no... (...) I imagine you could just do something like lnp_addressing_set_handler( PORT, (lnp_addressing_handler_t) NULL ); I'm also curious as to why (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Announcing BricxCC release 3.3.5.7
|
|
I've just uploaded another revision of BricxCC (version 3.3.5.7). This release removes the 2.0 SDK DLLs since I do not have a license to redistribute those DLLs. This release fixes more Graphing issues. Users can optionally have the graph maintain (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | is it possible to remove lnp_handler while running ?
|
|
another dumb question about lnp:) i was wondering if it possible to do something like lnp_addressing_remov...,handler); as opposed to lnp_addressing_set_h...,handler); after much debugging i think i have traced my problem to the fact that (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Re: Scheduler patch
|
|
I have been thinking (and toying with some ideas) concerning tthe wakeup checking. It might be possible to do wakeup checking more often then between each timeslice. This would make msleep more accurate and provide better sensor handling. I know (...) (22 years ago, 16-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
