 | | Direct Link (was Global Objects was Strange RCX startup issues)
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, Mark Riley wrote: ... (...) All right, this brings up an interesting question. I can use BrickOS well enough to make it do cool stuff, but I really don't know all the cool stuff BrickOS can do... If I read this (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: My problems with adding a Best Fit algorithm for memory management to kernel/mm.c
|
|
Mark Riley wrote: [snip] (...) This is easy enough to implement (1 or 2 lines), but raises the question: Should these memory strategies be included with BrickOS (with a config.h flag to control it)? I am sure the educators would rather leave that (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Objects was Strange RCX startup issues
|
|
Understood. In this case, I am thinking that the option should be ON by default; such that a new, less experienced user would not encounter a problem; but an experienced user could turn the option off. // Joe (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Objects was Strange RCX startup issues
|
|
(...) But, it perhaps should default to being enabled as this deficiency has caused some confusion in the past. Great work, Joe! Mark (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Objects was Strange RCX startup issues
|
|
(...) I opt for option. Not much may be to much in some cases. And I don't want to program in c++ anyway. Regards, Michael (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Objects was Strange RCX startup issues
|
|
(...) [snipped] (...) I simply added ctor_size and dtor_size to the *image*, *lx* and *program* structures. This allows the program manager to calc the start and end of these segments. (...) It wasn't as hard as I had thought. I have the fix (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Memory, Motors and Odd Things
|
|
(...) no. Ok, that's my first problem. (...) hmm. yep. malloc()... (...) no, using the firmdl3. (...) Yes, it's recursive. And, I'm sure your hunch is right. (...) It sounds like it's the malloc() bug. I'm using 0.2.6.09 (?) I'm not going to switch (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: BricxCC release 3.3.7.6
|
|
(...) Wow! I've just discovered Bricxcc! Thank you very much for providing such a useful tool. I'm using PbForth and I was impressed by what you've included in BricxCC. Just to share with you, here's what I did so far. I've renamed the Help file so (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.robotics.spybotics, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: My problems with adding a Best Fit algorithm for memory management to kernel/mm.c
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) <snip> (...) <snip> I didn't have time to mention this in my earlier post, but this memory dump points out a potential problem with the way BrickOS allocates memory for programs. In the above memory dump, the 0x6B words at 0xB648 (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Memory, Motors and Odd Things
|
|
(...) Hi Steve, Are you using BrickOS 0.2.6.10? In earlier versions, it was possible for malloc() to return pointers to RAM in the range [F010,FB7F], which was shared with the motor port controller. Writing to this memory adversely affected the (...) (21 years ago, 11-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Logging sensor data
|
|
(...) That's why I use brickOS nanobapt (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Memory, Motors and Odd Things
|
|
I ran into something odd, and I'm wondering if someone can explain it. I have a pretty large BrickOS program, (the .lx is about 9k) and it uses around 2k for variables. (I think) I've noticed when the program is running, it's not doing anything with (...) (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Logging sensor data
|
|
(...) No, I regret to say, you must buy it. Jerry (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Logging sensor data
|
|
(...) does robolab is free ? nanobapt (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Logging sensor data
|
|
(...) If you had not already decided to use LegOS/BrickOS you might have used Robolab, which has nice sensor data-logging utilities built-in. I show a sensor log in my project 'The LEGO Level' at (URL) It's very easy to set up. Jerry (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Linux legos install help me please
|
|
(...) Oups nbo sorry ... not for the moment but I can implement it !! Oh if someone know how to make work the USB tower under linux (to add this function to legnoppix) that would be fun (...) Yes that only this file ... (...) Yes put it in the (...) (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Logging sensor data
|
|
(...) Arg .... you don't want to use legnoppix or something like that ? I don't know how implement LNPD to cygwin or other stuff like that nanobapt (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Objects was Strange RCX startup issues
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) Yes, I took a peek at the dll code and it looks like only one packet type would have to be extended to add this additional information. When not using the program manager (i.e. linking the user program directly to BrickOS), then (...) (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Linux legos install help me please
|
|
Wow thanks for the speedy response nanobapt. I am going to attempt to run legnoppix as a guestthrough VMware tonight. I will keep you posted on how that goes. Whati am really interested in is the math. Nano wrote (...) 1st Are you saying that (...) (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Global Objects was Strange RCX startup issues
|
|
Doh! I think I just answered the question (of course it was After hitting send) Joseph Woolley wrote: [snip] > Also, I have a question (because of my limited knowledge of how the > __ctors and __dtors are managed): Would the two *for* loops in your (...) (21 years ago, 9-Dec-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
