To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqcOpen lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / RCX / NQC / 289
288  |  290
Subject: 
Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
Date: 
Sat, 11 Dec 1999 03:20:04 GMT
Reply-To: 
tking@together.netAVOIDSPAM
Viewed: 
1777 times
  
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 CASE in Pascal. The
PIC microcomputers have a 'computed goto table' approach that
lends itself easily to FSMs.

Long ago, I used some macro libraries to help build FSMs in
'C'.  Don't think I still have any of that stuff. I had someone write
a graphically-based system that generated 'C' also, but that must
be buried at my previous employer.  Hmmm..  I think the best thing right
now would be some simple examples.  Dave, have you thought about this??

I find the classical Finite State Machine definition somewhat inefficient,
as often an action must be taken upon Entering a State. You end up with a lot of
states that are really init sections for other states.  I adopted a different
model in which the definition of a state could optionally include an
unconditional action that happened as the state was entered.  This created
a few minor religious wars, but worked well in Factory Control systems.

I would like to keep in touch on this subject, with anyone interested.  One of
my kids wrote a real time operating system for 8051 that included some kind of
FSM support. I'll have to ask him about it...

Interesting!

--
Regards,
Terry King   ...In The Woods In Vermont



Message has 1 Reply:
  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)

Message is in Reply To:
  Implementing Finite State Machines
 
Hi all! I have been struggling with a fairly large FSM implementation in NQC and came to realize that maybe most of the more advanced NQC applications might be actually FSMs (or could become)... Because I think it is a little awkward to handle a FSM (...) (25 years ago, 9-Dec-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)

5 Messages in This Thread:


Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR