 | | Re: 1.0 brick not responding
|
|
(...) Generally, that means the IR tower is working. It's possible the tower has become broken, while it sat in a closet, but that's not very likely. So, knowing things worked before, you may be forgetting something. Make sure the memory is cleared. (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: 1.0 brick not responding
|
|
(...) Yes, it flashes. (...) Yes it did work, but it's been in storage for a couple of years. (...) At this point, just download firmware. Once I get the communication issues resolved, I'll do programming. (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) I agree with Steve that the code samples you posted are probably BrickOS. Now to acheive what you want, it might be a waste of power, but you could always blank off the light itself with a peice of black card or thin black packing plastic. If (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) Matt, There are a few ways you can program your RCX. The main choice is if you use the standard firmware, or not. The firmware is pretty much like Windows Operating System. If you use NQC & the standard firmware, you don't need to worry about (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) inside the RCX *directly*, not running programs layered on top of the standard firmware. And if you want to use NQC, you have to work within the limits of the standard firmware (OK, ignoring Dick Swan's firmware, which I've still not been able (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) Hi Brian, Thanks for your response. (...) I'm not sure if I get this, because of C code examples I've seen, which I'll discuss again below. (...) I've tried this already, and as you say, it works, but the sensitivity goes waay down. For a (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
On Mon, September 12, 2005 8:03 pm, Brian Davis wrote: ... (...) ... Somewhere in there, it tells you the RCX will not accept the same command twice in a row. Each command has two op codes that are 8 digits apart. So (I think) for SetWatch you (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
(...) Perhaps - but the standard firmware implements a "virtual machine", and so you don't generally have access to physical registers. But... (...) You can configure the input port that the light sensor is connected to as a "passive" sensor (so (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | RCX to RCX NQC
|
|
In a semi-followup to Steve's earlier "remote battery tester"... While the standard firmware provides almost no way to get bytes into the RCX (other than "Message()", one byte at a time), it can certainly export them ("SendSerial"). And it occured (...) (19 years ago, 13-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | direct manipulation of bits in RCX registers using NQC
|
|
Hi all, Can anyone tell me if it is possible to use NQC to directly set bits in RCX registers? And if so, how does one do it? I've seen C code examples of this in a few places, but no NQC examples. Specifically, I want to turn on and off the red (...) (19 years ago, 12-Sep-05, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
