Subject:
|
Re: Robolab, byte codes and assembler
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab
|
Date:
|
Thu, 27 Nov 2003 19:45:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
9839 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab, Claude Baumann wrote:
> We should not forget that the RCX has initially been designed for kids. So the
> standard firmware should be considered according to the initial aims, which were
> to provide a really great tool - toy for children. Therefore the firmware
> designers had an ambituous task to do... and they have done it brillantly. The
> many -unfounded- critics appear to me somehow primitive, since you compare - as
> we say "Äppel mat Biren" (apples with pears).
Please don't take my post as a criticism of the original firmware, I merely
wanted to point out alternatives. I agree, the 3ms sample rate is more than
adequate for most applications.
> The standard firmware builders had
> the job to realize a stable, reliable, easy to use program for kids who are able
> to do the most incredible things, no designers could ever have imagined :
> short-circuits, pressing all buttons together....
Yes, the RCX is rugged in many respects, but I think you're selling other
engineers short by indicating they wouldn't anticipate that kind of abuse - if
other products are found lacking in durability, I'd think it more likely the
bean counters were at fault.
> Have you ever programmed a correctly debounced button?
Well, yes, but I don't see the relevance here.
However, I will say one thing. I think the Lego programmers were ill served by
the C compiler they chose to utilize. The standard firmware could have been
much smaller and faster if they had a good optimizing compiler available to
them.
Mark
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Robolab, byte codes and assembler
|
| OK You do something great, and all the world is looking at it, finding the finest detail one could have made much better. That's the power of internet-exchange. Don't take this personally. I only wanted to remind the great job they did at LEGO's (...) (21 years ago, 27-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab)
| | | Re: Robolab, byte codes and assembler
|
| (...) <snip> (...) I'm quite interested in the alternative firmware for myself. However, for this particular problem, if a correct rotation count is my "Apollo 13's needed filter", then Robolab is the "cover of the flight manual" - it's what I have (...) (21 years ago, 28-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Robolab, byte codes and assembler
|
| (...) We should not forget that the RCX has initially been designed for kids. So the standard firmware should be considered according to the initial aims, which were to provide a really great tool - toy for children. Therefore the firmware designers (...) (21 years ago, 27-Nov-03, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.robolab)
|
24 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
|
|
|
|
