 | | Re: RCX <-> PC communication, more details
|
|
Hi Kaspar, Thanx for the information. In the Lejos-discussion mailing list (Sept 13), Lawrie Griffiths wrote: "A timeout of 100 milliseconds or more should ensure that it reads all the bytes in one message." Looks like it confirms what you (...) (24 years ago, 16-Sep-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX <-> PC communication, more details
|
|
(...) Great, I just had too much time at hand, so I could already test the hypothesis above. Great, to be able to post a followup to my own message within half an hour... Ok, here it comes: The PC __IS__ swamping the RCX when using the LNP protocol. (...) (24 years ago, 16-Sep-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
| |
| | RCX <-> PC communication, more details
|
|
Thanks for the three of you (Francois, Roger and Lawrence) who have answered to my questions. I was asked to state some more details, which I'll do here: I am working under linux (SuSE 7.3) and since the linux version of java does not yet support (...) (24 years ago, 16-Sep-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX <-> PC communication
|
|
(...) Lawrie Griffiths asked me to forward the following to you: RCXPort should be about twice as fast as RCXF7Port. Do you have a serial or USB tower? I am concerned that you don't get complete reliabilty with RCXPort - I do with a USB Tower. (24 years ago, 14-Sep-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX <-> PC communication
|
|
(...) I have not done any experimenting with Data Streams yet since I can get by with bytes. I have tried both the RCXPort and the RCXF7Port. The big advantage of the RCXPort using the LLC protocol is that if the RCX gets out of range or behind an (...) (24 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.java)
|
