 | | Re: The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
(...) huh? Do you mean it just writes text to the RCX without any synchronization or checksums? Then how is it going to be an improvement over a plain ascii upload using e.g. ascii-xfr? (...) But then you can't use those constants (i.e the words, (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
(...) That's because the SREC upload uses the native upload code in the RCX ROM. It works really well but has to send each byte as a pair with the bits inverted. Also the header and trailer have to be added. The result is that it would be impossible (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 09:04:26PM +0000, Ralph Hempel wrote: [...On a TCL program to communicate with the RCX...] (...) Uploading srec files has been without problem for me; it's uploading text that's painful. Does your program uses some protocol (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
I might be able to help somewhat. I use my PC running FreeBSD to talk to my RCX (RIS 1.5). After much heartache I found that if I used "ecu" as my terminal, it worked. I tried everything just to try them, and ecu worked the best. Ecu is old, but it (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
(...) Depends on which side of the fence you are on... (...) Hmmm. This is not good. I have ghad very good success with CRT, but I'm going to try a more general solution with Tcl. (...) I stopped supporting it late last year because it only worked (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | Re: The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
(...) Does that count as `tempted by the dark side' or `seen the light'? :) (...) itself. (...) I tried near and far mode, several distances, putting the tower and the RCX under a dark cloth... Everything I could think of except putting 'em where (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
(...) Good. I'm glad your on-side so far :-) (...) You are right. I have found that getting a reliable connection is very dependent on ambient light, the voltage of the RCX batteries, and the tower itself. Try to use the tower in NEAR mode so that (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | The pain of communicating with the RCX
|
|
The power of Forth lies in the ease with which a system can be built and and tested both incrementally and interactively. Unfortunately I'm experiencing severe difficulties estasblishing a reliable communication channel between my PC (Linux) and the (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth)
|
| |
| | RE: Drive R/C Servos with the RCX and pbForth (long)
|
|
<snipped discussion of the math of selling servo controller boards> (...) I'm not too worried about them stealing the idea. I can't imagine that none of their designers have thought about driving servos with the RCX. The circuit itself is so simple (...) (25 years ago, 13-Feb-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
| |
| | Re: Drive R/C Servos with the RCX and pbForth (long)
|
|
In lugnet.robotics, Ralph Hempel writes: <snip> (...) What they will do and what they can do are two separate questions. Basically they can do nothing about the sales. They can complain about not respecting their trademark, or of copying of their (...) (25 years ago, 13-Feb-00, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.robotics.rcx.pbforth, lugnet.robotics.rcx)
|
