 | | Re: Download problem
|
|
(...) you don't want to send source, you can always compile it and send the binary... nqc -Ofoo.rcx foo.nqc Another alternative would be to download it in verbose mode and send me the log... nqc -v -d foo.nqc >log My email is dbaum@enteract.com Dave (...) (25 years ago, 2-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
(...) I'm going from memory here, so I may miss a detail... int lock; #define TASK_BIT(task_num) (1 << task_num) void acquire_lock(int task_num) { while(1) { // wait for lock to be clear while(lock); // try to own it lock |= TASK_BIT(task_num); // (...) (25 years ago, 2-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Download problem
|
|
Hi Mario, I've encountered some weird problems like this too. I think I was able to fix things up by erasing the memory. In RcxCC, use the Tools -> Clear Memory option. Please let us know if that works. Jonathan (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Download problem
|
|
Hi Dave and everybody, I have a strange problem with an NQC program. It's something Marco Beri and I are preparing for the Mindfest. The program is rather large if compared to the average NQC programs: about 240 lines of code with large inline (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
(...) There is a way to do it even if you have no test and set, though I can't remember it off the top of my head, and it is slow. Don't see how using bitflags helps? Cheers, Ben. -- (URL) grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
On semaphores... There was a lot of discussion a long time ago on whether NQC should use semaphores to protect temp variables between tasks. There isn't an atomic test-and-set bytecode, so the only way I know of implementing sempaphore would be to (...) (25 years ago, 1-Oct-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
(...) I think that if you do something like this you should use a semaphore to secure no tasks access y and z simultanously. But that wastes another variable storing the sema. (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
(...) That's exaclty what I was thinking of doing. Originally, the compiler had no way of allocating temp variables which is why code for % couldn't be emitted. The temp allocator is now pretty good, so I could emit the above sequence, but it just (...) (25 years ago, 30-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
(...) x = y % z is equivalent to (where w is an temporary integer): w = y / z; x = y - z * w; I can't think of a useful use of % just with constants. Ciao. Marco. (25 years ago, 29-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Listening to IR via NQC
|
|
(...) FWIW, I did something similar to this using NQC and the Datalog. It uses variable0 for polling and letting the PC know the Datalog has some "stuff" it wants to send. (URL) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Listening to IR via NQC
|
|
(...) Cool, that'd be great. What I'm looking for is: nqc -listen and then all IR messages sent by the RCX via SendMessage would get dumped, one per line, in decimal, to stdout. Additional parameters could make the format be comma-delimited, (...) (25 years ago, 24-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Listening to IR via NQC
|
|
(...) You can sometimes fake it by sending "bad" codes in -raw mode with verbose mode turned on (-v) and a long timeout (-t). For example, to examine the Lego remote codes I kept typing this: nqc -v -t 2000 -raw 10 Since I didn't have an RCX around (...) (25 years ago, 24-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Listening to IR via NQC
|
|
(...) Yes, that is what I'm looking for. Unless anyone else knows of anything, I guess it's time to dive into the coding. :) (...) Yeah, that would work great. Does anyone have code that does this? (Don't want to reinvent the wheel...) I know of (...) (25 years ago, 24-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Listening to IR via NQC
|
|
(...) If I understand you correctly, then this is more difficult than it sounds, because the IR tower shuts down after a few seconds after the PC stops transmitting. Things work fine if the PC initiates a conversation (e.g. by asking the RCX to send (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Listening to IR via NQC
|
|
I know that NQC can send IR messages; can it -- or any other command-line program -- listen to the IR port and dump any incoming messages to a file (or stdout)? (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC mentioned in Swedish technical weekly!
|
|
Hello! When reading this week's 'Ny Teknik' (New Technic), a weekly magazine for engineers, I found a short note about NQC. The article is about Lego Mindstorms, which is just about to be released here in Sweden, and the last part of the article (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
A bug in the document. * and / are legal for any expressions. % is restricted to constants. I know the restrictions are confusing. The problem is that the RCX opcodes are somewhat incomplete. Now that I think about it, I can probably generate (...) (25 years ago, 23-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC 2.0 and some math questions
|
|
Dave, You state in your documentation that * / and % can be used on constants only, but your example has x * Y in it. What is it that you mean? Does this mean that one can only do a y = 5*4 using these math routines? Does this mean that, for (...) (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 has been released
|
|
(...) Yep, you got me. Should've been "one bug report". Dave (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC 2.0 has been released
|
|
(...) That would be "one _known_ bug", right? :) 2.0 looks great, by the way. (25 years ago, 22-Sep-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
