 | | Re: The BrickOS Task Manager
|
|
(...) Sorry, I'm still just not getting it at all. I have type errors all over the place trying to pass arguments to my task. Could someone please simply email me or post an example of a program that starts, runs two or more threads, and will (...) (21 years ago, 10-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Brickos fun and games!
|
|
Hello. I have finally got gcc 2.95.3 - the official brickos compiler - installed on my computer (SUSE Linux). I can type "make" and compile all the brickos directory fine. firmdl3 works fine. BUT, dll doesn't seem to work. When I use dll to download (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementation of Installable Timers
|
|
(...) It would seem reasonable to check the location of the struct; if in kernel memory, don't remove; if in user memory, remove. However, you could add a flag to the timer struct which could use T_KERNEL and T_USER flags. (...) I looked quickly (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: ...2 years later... :-) (was: newbie again part 2)
|
|
Hello, and thanks for the reply. In lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, Dave Baum wrote: . . . (...) That's where I thought it was, but who knows. I'll continue the quest. Thanks again -- as always I am impressed how easy it is on the Net to get to the roots (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC's future
|
|
(...) ;o) ... but why not ? (...) You're right, I should try pbForth, actually I intend to do that for a while but never jumped in. In the late 80's, I was involved in a point of sales terminal project that was programmed with a preemptive (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) For more fun with asserts: See if your compiler supports the FILE and LINE macros (or something equivilant). #ifdef NDEBUG #define assert(x) ((void)0) #else #define assert(x) if (x) else assertfail(FILE,LINE); #endif your assert_fail function (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementation of Installable Timers
|
|
(...) You are right. I found in an app that I was using that if I pressed the run / stop button, my task would be killed, and leave a dangling timer - which would usually blow the little brick into the weeds :o) I 'solved' it in a crude way by (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: ...2 years later... :-) (was: newbie again part 2)
|
|
(...) It's been a long time since I looked at any of this, but I don't think the version of the NQC compiler is an issue, nor is the -1 option. The .rcx file format has been pretty stable for a long time. The -1 allows old source programs to be (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Q for Ralph
|
|
Why, exactly, does pbForth use a terminal emulator for the PC to talk to the RCX? Although I admit I find it an interesting concept (it's got a certain nostalgic appeal, at least for me), the design seems to encourage leaving the RCX on for extended (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | IR problems
|
|
Hi, I was having some problems in a program I'm writing in PbForth and it seems that it could be related to the way I communicate thru IR. I use the Lego remote control. I joined the following code to demonstrate. I use the word 'getHeader' from (...) (21 years ago, 9-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | ...2 years later... :-) (was: newbie again part 2)
|
|
Hello All, In lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, Dave Baum wrote (almost two years ago, Thu, 17 Jan 2002 00:34:56 GMT -- your words are cherished, Dave! :-): (...) [...] (...) Well, I am not (yet) a Java programmer, but try to become one, and would like to (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementation of Installable Timers
|
|
Iain McInnes wrote: [snip] (...) Great idea! (...) In your implementation, would it be possible for the client task to be killed (in the case of a run-away task)... causing the struct to be deallocated... while the struct is still in the linked (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Points to: 'Implementation of Installable Timers'
|
|
Hi, ppl. I posted this one in the wrong place :0 (URL) Enjoy ! Iain. (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Points to 'Design by Contract'
|
|
Hi, Folks, I posted some stuff on an assert() macro - in the wrong place - (D'oH). The thread is here: (URL) Enjoy ! Iain. (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) I agree it seems to be the wrong way round. That's the standard implementation. NDEBUG seems to stand for "No debug". One advantage of making it negative, is that you get the assert()s if you don't do anything (ie dont define NDEBUG). BTW, (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) D'oH! Thanks, Tim. I was very careful composing the original post, but added the example in as an after thought - Well spotted. Iain. (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | RE: NQC's future
|
|
(...) Ha Ha, very funny :-) Seriously, Philippe, why not give pbForth a try? I know that NQC works great on both the Spybots and the RCX, and even Cybermaster. But if you're looking for speed, higher precision, lots of variables and generally more (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC's future
|
|
(...) Something I'd like to see implemented in NQC is a mixed-mode multiply/divide, similar to the */ operator in Forth, with an intermediary 32bits product. That would greatly ease precision calculations without requiring major structural (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Design by Contract (long post)
|
|
(...) <delurk> The first definition of assert is the correct, standard definition. However there is a slight boo boo in the original post in the line: assert (myptr = malloc (sizeof (mystruct)); Which will delete the malloc when NDEBUG is defined. (...) (21 years ago, 8-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, FTX)
|
| |
| | USB Tower range
|
|
Hi, I recently bought the RCX2.0 and I am a little disappointed at the range for the USB tower. Though configured to be at long range I doubt I can implement a range greater then 5 or 6 feet. Is this normal.? Am I missing something.? Paul Reedman (21 years ago, 7-Jan-04, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
