 | | Re: Timing of RCX statements
|
|
(...) Thanky Dave for your reflections concerning the timing. The thing that caused some astonishment and a little bit of frustration is that the RCX is so slow. O.K. - the code sent to the RCX is interpreted and this needs some time. However, I was (...) (24 years ago, 24-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Monitor() and Event()
|
|
(...) I decided to write a small sample program showing how to configure events. Check out events.nqc at (URL) reply to: dbaum at enteract dot com (24 years ago, 24-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Monitor() and Event()
|
|
(...) Monitoring is automatic (done by the firmware). Monitoring stops when control leaves the monitor statement, so something like this: while(true) { monitor(EVENTS) { } catch { } } will miss a lot of events. You need to configure the events using (...) (24 years ago, 24-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Timing of RCX statements
|
|
(...) I wouldn't expect Wait() to be very precise. I haven't looked at the firmware in great detail, but generally when writing this sort of thing you set up timing chains. Imagine a function that gets called every 1ms for bookkeeping... void (...) (24 years ago, 24-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Timing of RCX statements
|
|
I was trying to simulate a serial link by using an output of the RCX. I didn't work and when I analyzed the timing, I found out that the RCX's execution of statements is far too slow for the protocol I wanted to simulate. So I made some measurements (...) (24 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Monitor() and Event()
|
|
Can someone teach me more on Monitor() and Event()? Does the Monitor() check the event status repeatly or we have to make a repeat task to activate the monitoring job? If it is not checking the event status repeatly, why we cannot just read the (...) (24 years ago, 23-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC 2.2 r2 released
|
|
A few minor bug fixes from r1 (URL) reply to: dbaum at enteract dot com (24 years ago, 22-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: RCX Code tutorial or better program all together?
|
|
(...) There sure is.... NQC, a program of the gods. (URL) the news group lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc is where you discuss NQC. -- Coin-Op's For Sale!: (URL) Lego Workshop: (URL) Lego Club: (URL) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Connecting 2 RCXs
|
|
(...) Hook up the output of RCX.A to the Input of RCX.B. Set the RCX.B's input to Touch. Now toggle the RCX.A's output from OFF and float. This will turn the ground 'short' on and off and work Exactly like a switch. No power runs though the Input (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | NQC and RCXCC
|
|
Using NQC together with RCXCC (by Mark Overmars) is a fine combination that fulfills my demands for writing software, debugging and testing. Unfortunately, Mark Overmars, the author of RCXCC will not do any further development for this product. (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Connecting 2 RCXs
|
|
The IR interface is one way to establish a "connection" via messages between 2 RCXs and it works fine if both of the RCXs will receive a message - directly or by multiple reflections within the room. However, it is a slow communication. My problem (...) (24 years ago, 19-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: Vision Command
|
|
No. There isn't any. You cannot control the camera form NQC or the RCX for that matter. You can respond to the messages that the Camera sends to the brick via Message(). I hope this syntax is right.... until(Message)>0); switch(Message()) case 1: // (...) (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Vision Command
|
|
Is there syntax that I am missing to address the "Vision Command" camera? Thanx! Ed (24 years ago, 18-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | "True" Interrupts
|
|
When I did some work with the new control structures, I found out that they are quite nice (monitor and acquire). However, you could do the same in the past but you needed to split your program into several tasks which are controlled of a task (...) (24 years ago, 11-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: The Datalog
|
|
(...) That's why my post ended on a positive note. It's not that I'm ungrateful. Without Lego I wouldn't have hundreds of thousands of bricks all over my house... heh heh. I also wouldn't have 3 RCX's, a Scout & a Micro Scout. Lego just moves very (...) (24 years ago, 11-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: The Datalog
|
|
(...) In that case: Dear Lego: Please allow random memory access via the next firmware, either through access to the datalog or some other mechanism. Thanks! (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc, lugnet.dear-lego)
|
| |
| | Re: The Datalog
|
|
(...) I wouldn't be quite so pessimistic. Although TLG doesn't really participate in these conversations, I'm certain they are reading them. Also, several of the more annoying limitations of the original firmware were removed (or at least eased) (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: NQC
|
|
(...) Open source software at it's best! Dean -- Coin-Op's For Sale!: (URL) Lego Workshop: (URL) Lego Club: (URL) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: The Datalog
|
|
(...) Lego has made it quite clear that they will not listen to us. They say that it pollutes their vision or something. All we can do is hope that the few people they do ask for feedback will point out these 'lacking' points. But, since version 2.0 (...) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
| |
| | Re: The Datalog
|
|
(...) I think you answered your own question. :) (24 years ago, 10-Oct-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.nqc)
|
