 | | RE: New RcxCC revision posted
|
|
Hi, Ok, so, I got home, downloaded the .zip, installed it on my "LegoStation" (a 486 with RCX2 on COM2 and CyberMaster on COM3) over the last version. I think this was the "3.2 May 16th" Version. Started up, defined the window sizes and positions (...) (24 years ago, 17-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: New RcxCC revision posted
|
|
(...) Be sure to use the most recent version to test the startup options. I tested it the other day and it seemed slightly broken but the last round of fixes which I uploaded on Saturday may have fixed the problems. I'll be doing some more testing (...) (24 years ago, 16-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | RE: New RcxCC revision posted
|
|
(...) As I said earlier, I use this kind of setup. These options seam perfect, thanks John. I'll test it, when I get back home and post my findings. mc. (24 years ago, 16-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: New RcxCC revision posted
|
|
(...) You can select text and indent it with Ctrl+Shift+I and unindent it with Ctrl+Shift+U. These keystrokes are configurable in the Preferences dialog. Look for ecBlockIndent and ecBlockUnindent. Scanning through the list of editor commands might (...) (24 years ago, 14-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Fast data acquistion on PC from RCX ?
|
|
I want to do fast data acquistion (100 samples/second) continuously with the RCX and transport the data in realtime to a PC. I'm building a oscilloscope to monitor sensors and globals variables on the PC, a bit like "Mr. Sensor Program" (URL) was (...) (24 years ago, 14-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: New RcxCC revision posted
|
|
(...) Well I'm glad you apologized. :) I just finished downloading and testing your previous version only to find that there is even a newer one. I really like the new editing features BTW. The multilevel undo and the line numbers are a great (...) (24 years ago, 14-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: New RcxCC revision posted
|
|
(...) Okay, another round of fixes/modifications. Sorry I'm making these changes so fast. I am *really* interested in hearing from anyone who is trying out my revised RcxCC, by the way. :-) Anyway, this version (available from the link above) (...) (24 years ago, 13-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Which way is faster?
|
|
By "fastest", I assume you mean the smallest worst case latency between a condition happening and the RCX responding to it. Option #2 has the drawback that while the RCX is responding to one condition, it won't be looking for the other ones. So the (...) (24 years ago, 13-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Which way is faster?
|
|
I want to know which way is faster: 1. Use three tasks to watch sensors task watch1() { while (true) { if () { .. } } } task watch2() { while (true) { if () { .. } } } task watch3() { while (true) { if () { .. } } } 2. Use one task with multi (...) (24 years ago, 13-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | New RcxCC revision posted
|
|
Anyone who is interested in trying my revised RcxCC can find a copy at: (URL) just uploaded another revision that implements several new features: 1) command line switches: /? or /help = display a help message on startup before continuing /COM=N = (...) (24 years ago, 12-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
