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 / 293
292  |  294
Subject: 
Re: Implementing Finite State Machines
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc
Date: 
Sun, 12 Dec 1999 01:25:52 GMT
Reply-To: 
tking@together.ANTISPAMnet
Viewed: 
2025 times
  
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 properly commented,
and burying details in a macro system seems unwarranted.

The primary case for using Finite State Machines, to me,
is when there are two fairly independent things happening
but those things need to coordinate with each other.
Communications protocols are the obvious example. But,
two separate Rcx based Robots that communicate is the
example I look forward to doing.

The 'Cool Thing' is to have two absolutely identical FSM's that
communicate to each other and behave in an appropriately
DIFFERENT fashion. Again, bidirectional communications
protocols are a good example.

To digress (my most common Sin):
Once I promised not to use the "I" word again. But I don't work
for those guys anymore.  Instantiation!  Since we don't have
reusable, reentrant code in Rcx we can leave that, thankfully,
on a dusty academic shelf...

With sincere apologies to those coding every day to pay the mortgage,
I just have to say:
I LOVE watching my Grandchildren write code that's simple and that
they can explain to me.  It's SO much more fun than working on
projects that are destined to prove Brooks' Law Yet Again.*

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


*For the UnBloodied:
"Adding Manpower to a Late Software Project makes it LATER"
Ref: Fred Brooks THE MYTHICAL MAN MONTH



Message is in Reply To:
  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)

5 Messages in This Thread:


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

Custom Search

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