 | | How did you made nqc?
|
|
Hello ! Being a fervent user of NQC, (thanks mr Baum!) I'm asking myself how nqc has been made. I know it's a very complex topic, but some explication for non programming-specialists could be very interesting. And because the rcx has quite limited (...) (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | RIS 1.0 Sightings
|
|
If anyone is wanting them, I'm still seeing RIS 1.0 systems with the 'upgrade to 1.5' sticker on them at most the local Best Buys in NE Kansas (IE Topeka and Overland Park Areas) Tom (25 years ago, 13-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RIS 1.0 vs 1.5: which more "desirable"?
|
|
(...) Sorry, should have said the command console, which does use the VB stuff, and also (of course), sending anything yourself from VB... (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RIS 1.0 vs 1.5: which more "desirable"?
|
|
(...) That's not true. Neither NQC nor LegOS require any vbx files. (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
Dave, I like the idea of teaching how to solve certain problems both with multiple threads and with a Finite State Machine. Adding "switch" would be great! Personally I think that a plain 'C' FSM using switch can be made to look very clear if (...) (25 years ago, 12-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RIS 1.0 vs 1.5: which more "desirable"?
|
|
(...) The problem is that 1.5, does not have the vbx file to allow these to work. You have to get this from a version 1 system. (...) 1.5, adds quite a few useful pieces, but loses a few others. Having '1' upgraded, gives you the best of both (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) FSMs are a boon in our behavioural robotics projects. If you have read the Rod Brooks papers, he uses them to implement subsumptive architectures in his "radical" robots. I have used them a LOT in my Stamp II robots as the only (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
(...) Adding a switch statement to NQC would certainly help make implementation easier...I'll see if I can work it into the next release. Actually, I've been somewhat surprised by the general lack of needing FSMs in my own Mindstorms programming. I (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
|
|
Vlad, The Finite State Machine is a good subject for people to consider in robotics, especially in coding the typical 'looping forever' Rcx applications. Lots of regular 'C' FSM's are implemented with a State variable and "switch" statements, or (...) (25 years ago, 11-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: "No reply from RCX" with nqc...
|
|
(...) thank you (and bob fay) for your two responses. i have a sneaking suspicion that bob was right on with the curious battery problem. i opened my tower battery case and "re-seated" the battery. (and i confirmed it *was* in the proper (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
