 | | Re: command framing as seen from kernel/program.lrkey_handler
|
|
"Pat LaVarre" <ppaatt@aol.com> wrote in message news:H9n64q.B2p@lugnet.com... (...) I dunno, haven't found one yet, though. (...) choice (...) Touché. Yes, tables, overlooked that. (...) the (...) expensive (...) I think that smaller code size is (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: command framing as seen from kernel/program.lrkey_handler
|
|
(...) Mmmmm. I am curious, if that's ok. To get log2(xx) in O(1) time we could fetch (p[xx & -xx]) i.e. fetch our choice of the bytes at offset x 0 1 2 4 8 10 20 40 80 from some p we like. Merely standard C can't easily express that old idea without (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: frame RCX reply how
|
|
(...) Anyone know more specifically where to read how Lejos frames standard RCX IR replies? Does Lejos even include any .java code that runs on the PC? I mean to be asking how a PC should frame the standard replies from Lego RCX fimware, not how a (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
| |
| | Re: frame RCX reply how
|
|
(...) Ah, thanks. Can we therefore conclude 45.8 ms/byte = 11/2400 s/byte for each byte of a burst? (...) Tell me more? Do we mean to say RCX in the middle of a football field echoes less well? Should I discard the echo, rather than checking it for (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: command framing as seen from kernel/program.lrkey_handler
|
|
(...) (URL) The missing (key & -key) might interest people who haven't used log2 & - to (...) number (...) and (...) log2(key (...) If I'm interpreting your shorthand correctly: there's no fast way to execute log2() on the H8 (i.e. no O(1) (...) (22 years ago, 1-Feb-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
