Subject:
|
Re: light sensor problem?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:57:25 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1945 times
|
| |
|
|
> Those values used to pretty cleanly define max and min- or at least, they
> must have, since I consistently got 15-105 values (or roughly what he
> projected.)
I supposed so, but only to get a "fast scaling"?
> Like I said, those values really were pegged to actual read values.
> Something has occurred to change them. If it can't be fixed, that's fine.
> It wouldn't be too hard to do a little math and make the values "correct."
> (i.e., 0-100). However, it won't be nearly as fast as the X>>7 that used
> to be used. So, I don't know which is the "correct" answer- to scale
> (relatively slowly) or not to scale. What do other users/developers think?
> Either way, I have to change documentation, so...
I can "rescale" those values by theoretical calculation and maintain >>7 or
make the right conversion (0-100).
Now I've done the right scaling (ready to commit), but I sincerely think
that absolute (%) values is quite relative working with light sensors, so I
should prefer the fastest >>7 version...
I need more opinions!!! :-)
Bye,
Paolo.
---
An army of sheep led by a lion could easily defeat an army of lions led by a
sheep - Arab Proverb
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: light sensor problem?
|
| (...) Oh! So readings are more stable, and it isn't just my imagination. That's good to know :) (...) Those values used to pretty cleanly define max and min- or at least, they must have, since I consistently got 15-105 values (or roughly what he (...) (24 years ago, 24-Jul-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
26 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
