 | | 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 (...) (23 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. (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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) (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 = (...) (23 years ago, 12-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC for Mac OS X released
|
|
I'm sure there are tons of eager Mac users out there who want to start using OS X, but were afraid they'd have to give up Mindstorms. Well, the wait is over... I added a Mac OS X build of NQC to the releases at (URL) Baum (23 years ago, 12-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
