 | | Re: Motor Speed value interpretation?
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, Rossz Vamos-Wentworth writes: ... (...) hmmm... did your wife figure out what vamos means... you might have to change that one too :-) sorry, but now I don't remember the question about the motor speed (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Motor Speed value interpretation?
|
|
(...) My birth name is actually Ross, but I changed it to Rossz when I married my Hungarian wife. In her language it means 'bad'. :) Rossz (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: C++ OverHead
|
|
(...) Hi, unfortunately I am unable to answer your question, however I am very interested in what you are doing with GA. I recently recieved my RCX and have done GA work in the past as part of my schoolwork. I would love to try using some GAs with (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Parallel sensor problem
|
|
Bernardo Dal Seno <piu1759@cdc8g5.cdc.polimi.it> wrote in message news:87d7dd25ge.fsf@...o.bogus... (...) crane, and (...) RCX 2. (...) like: (...) Thanks. I'll try that. (...) happens (...) connected to (...) Nup. I disconnected the motor, but the (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Parallel sensor problem
|
|
(...) I don't know if this is your problem, but the input ports have polarity (one lead is connected to ground and the other to +5V through a resistor, if I remember correctly). Have you tried to change polarities? (...) Maybe the problem is not in (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.5 and LNP
|
|
(...) On the RCX the LNP handlers are called from an interrupt handler, so after the execution of lnp_*_set_handler() you can safely assume that the old handler will not be called any more. On a PC things are different, there is a problem. I didn't (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: C++ OverHead
|
|
I seem to recall someone doing some testing that showed that C++ programs worked out to take out somewhere around 2 to 3 times the space of comparable C programs. However, I'm sure that varies. Luis (...) ---...--- "Nobody ever said that democracy (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Motor Speed value interpretation?
|
|
(...) As far as I can tell, the speed value really affects power output. This indirectly affects speed, but not in a very happy way. You end up with a wide range of values that give you nearly the same speed, then a very short range that decreases (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | C++ OverHead
|
|
Hi all, a simple question ( I hope) I'm running a small GA on my rcx block , and I'm fairly happy qwith my results so far, it evolves well tot he conditions, however I'd like to try something new <g>... I'm going to try to evolve sub-sumptive (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Parallel sensor problem
|
|
Hi, all. I'm experiencing a strange problem. I'm using two RCXs to control my crane, and I have a single touch sensor connected to input 1 on RCX 1 & input 2 on RCX 2. However, when I run both programs, which both have a wait_event function like: (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Motor Speed value interpretation?
|
|
(...) Greetings! Another Ross!! That's three hangin' around here now!! Well, OK ones a Rossz, but it's close enough! (...) driven (...) have (...) two (...) you (...) hit (...) Well, you could work it out really carefully, but then you've gotta take (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Motor Speed value interpretation?
|
|
Hi all, sorry if this question has been asked before but i was just wondering what the speed values for the motors represent? i have a robot with two motor driven wheels which i would like to be able to make drive in an arc. To do this i have to set (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.5 and LNP
|
|
(...) was like this: (...) you reload (...) PC, as you are (...) thing is to read (...) place of (...) optimize it and (...) what you want (...) attribute. Yes, but I'm not sure what could happen if I change those addresses in the middle of the (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.5 and LNP
|
|
(...) Ok. Checking and testing never hurts :-). (...) It's not for performance, but for correctness. The old code was like this: if(lnp_addressing_ha...ler[port]) { ... lnp_addressing_handl...th-2,src); You first test lnp_integrity_handler and then, (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.5 and LNP
|
|
(...) you may see (...) give access (...) the handlers (...) My only (...) depend on. (...) introduce a (...) this point to (...) I think that we can use safely (CONF_TM || defined CONF_HOST) condition. I'm checking the whole patch and I think that (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.5 and LNP
|
|
(...) I cleaned up my code (found one bug!), the patch follows. As you may see now there are two semaphore, because two are the resources to give access to: the LNP buffer and the IR port. I modified the calling of the handlers to avoid race (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: undefined reference to `___ucmpsi2'
|
|
(...) With regards to this, it appears that Markus left out two necessary functions in lib/mint. Specifically, cmpsi2 and ucmpsi2. These are a part of librcx but apparently they were omitted from LegOS when Markus included support for the other (...) (24 years ago, 19-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: undefined reference to `___ucmpsi2'
|
|
(...) Another choice may be a cast in the switch statement, like this: static wakeup_t light_found(wakeup_t sens_num) { switch ((unsigned int)sens_num) { case 2: return (LIGHT(SENSOR_2) > THRESHOLD); break; case 3: return (LIGHT(SENSOR_3) > (...) (24 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: LegOS 0.2.5 and LNP
|
|
(...) Ok, I clean up the code and send you a patch. (...) This one is not yet ready. As soon as I do it you'll know. bye Bernardo (24 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: util/dll-src makefile patch
|
|
(...) current cvs (...) lnp.c under (...) windows. The other (...) They works. :-) Bye, Paolo. --- I'm an optimist, but I don't think it helps. (24 years ago, 18-Jan-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
