 | | Rechargable battery questions
|
|
Greetings, I am yet another lucky person graced with an RIS this holiday season. I already seem doomed to buying more Lego sets for extra parts. I was quickly thwarted trying to build examples in Jonathan Knudsen's book which I assume is based on (...) (26 years ago, 14-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | More details : "Exploration Mars" and "Ultimate Accessory Set" for the RCX available in march ?
|
|
Hi again all, Thanks to Jesper Kjaer, here is posted more information and detailled pictures for these to sets. Please see : (URL) large pictures posted). About Exploration Mars (#9736) : - Unfortunately, this set doesn't seems to contain a cam... - (...) (26 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | "Exploration Mars" and "Ultimate Accessory Set" for the RCX available in march ?
|
|
Hi All, As seen on the 2000 DK catalog, page 58 : (URL) Mars will be available in March... But there is a new set : the "Ultimate Accessory set". Any ideas what it contains ? Seems some light bricks and some sensors, remote control, tachometer ??? (...) (26 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
(...) If I were writing NQC from scratch, I'd agree. However, several years ago I was writing a preprocessor and bison wasn't available to me, so I hand-coded the parser. When NQC was started, I just reused about 90% of this parser. Of coruse, along (...) (26 years ago, 13-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
Dave Baum schrieb: (...) Yes, definitely so. Many concepts in parser generators are actually OO (bison result types, for example), but they aren't implemented that way. (...) Prof. Goos rather convincingly advocates generation as the do-all and (...) (26 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
Thank you, David. Your gode is great! I learned a lot from your quick example, though I prefer Java more. I will encapsulate RCX commands in some utility objects and use them in more higher level objects. What I focus now is make a RF/IR adapter to (...) (26 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
(...) OO works very well for things like a parse tree. I can add a new statement and just add its rules for semantic checking and code generation...all within its own class. I think part of the problem is that compiler design is a very heavily (...) (26 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
I should probably mention again that legOS supports C++, and supports it even better if you add void*builtin_new(size_t n){return malloc(n)}; to the appropriate library, as v0.3.0 will. The rest of this is off-topic. Dave Baum schrieb: (...) (...) (26 years ago, 12-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
Hi Eric, Yes, I believe you could create a sensor object on the VB side and write your code thinking in terms of a sensor object. Here's one way: =-=-=-= BEGIN SAMPLE CODE =-=-=-= Private m_SensorNumber As Integer Private m_SensorType As Integer (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
(...) but (...) More than that. You can (for instance) have a 'command' thread, which looks at a variable, and decides according to the values on this whether to turn left/right or issue some other response, and does this by changeing other values. (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
"TM" == Tobias Möller <tobias.moller@telia.com> writes: TM> If I´ve understood this multi-tasking right, then it means that TM> you can have one program running for the motors of a robot, and TM> another for the sensors, but at the same time. It (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
(...) That wasn't me! David Leeper (has been a computer programmer for 17 years! :^)) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
Hi Dave, On the RCX side, I wouldn't want true objects. I wouldn't want to fill up the RCX variables with vtables and the program memory with the code to use the vtables. But on the PC side of things I'm beginning to think objects can be very (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx, David Leeper writes: I´m no computer programmer, but I´ve downloaded NQC but haven´t installed it yet. If I´ve understood this multi-tasking right, then it means that you can have one program running for the motors of a (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
(...) I toyed with a couple of ideas for this, but most of the really useful things can't be done using the standard bytecodes. About the only thing I came up with was a way to wrap the standard API calls up into some classes. However, implementing (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
(...) IMHO, spirit.ocx doesn't provide OO capability - it does serve as an enabler, though. What it provides is the ability to write a VB program that writes an RCX program. This VB program can be as OO as you want it, but the calls to spirit.ocx (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: OO programing in RCX
|
|
What I mean is to think the RCX in OO. For example, I can add a sensor object in my programming code when I plug a sensor into my RCX. I can make the sensor object to interface with the RCX object in the OO manner. Is that possible? I learned some (...) (26 years ago, 11-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
(...) You are right, Matthew. It also supports the Mac and Unix, which RCX Code and the Spirit ActiveX control don't. David Leeper (26 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
(...) Even if you don't know C, NQC is pretty easy to learn. (26 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: How advanced can RCX programming be?
|
|
Hi Tobias, If you're a computer programmer, I'd definitly suggest using something other than the RCX Code method of writing programs for the RCX. NQC is a nice environment if you know C. If you know a language that supports ActiveX, you can program (...) (26 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics)
|
