sleep()

[Yellow Eyes]

In our code, we want to use the sleep() function. When we try to compile we get an error saying it can't find the function sleep(). What would we need to include in order to get this to work?

[KenWittlief]

I dont think you want to use any of the sleep modes - there is code that has to run for the RC to function correctly - the code runs in one continious loop - if you put the uP to sleep, it will stop till an interrupt occurs - I think it would cause the RC to lock up or reset on you.

Sleep modes are normally for low power applications, like PDAs or cell phone - your bot will be drawing 50 to 100 amps during a match, so whats 0.1 Amps more or less going to accomplish?

[Yellow Eyes]

what about a pause function? Same results?

[KenWittlief]

same problem, you have to let the main loop run, or the code that is buried in the RC (that we dont see) will say "hey, the user code stopped running, turn off all the victors and relays until it comes back"

( of course it says that in binary: 00011000101010101101101 :c)

[Yellow Eyes]

I was just informed it will be sleep(1); will that 1 millisecond make a difference and cause those problems?

[SeanCassidy]

What you could do(for autononmous) was have a start time and an end time to all things. Sort of like this:

//Autonomous code
go(1,0,18);   //Go forward (1 = fwd, 2 = rev), start at 0, and end at 1800ms
turn(1,19,25);  //Turn (1 = left, 2 = right), start at 1900ms end at 2500ms
//Notice the 1000ms delay!
moveArm(2,35,40); //Move arm ( 1 = up, 2 = down), start at 3500ms end at 4000ms

Of course, you'll need to use interrupts (use the white paper from Innovation First), and add a static counter to the t100msDelay, for increments of 100ms. More precision that using seconds. But, the way you should do it is it just sets a pwm (or whatever) equal to the correct value, and move on, when it comes back (you'll have to make it know that it already completed one and it's time to finish up) just set it to 127 or whatever. Very useful and very effective.

[Astronouth7303]

So is there a way to 'wait' while still having interrupts going? this would be the easiest way to write a Autonomous Script. You know, Left=255;Right=255;Wait(600);.

[mtrawls]

Originally Posted by Astronouth7303

So is there a way to 'wait' while still having interrupts going? this would be the easiest way to write a Autonomous Script. You know, Left=255;Right=255;Wait(600);.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what the advantage is of waiting. Why would you need to pause at a specific instruction for some amount of time? What would you need to do in auton mode that couldn't be accomplished by having a state where the drive motors are sent neutral values? You could just be sitting still "waiting" for some input to come your way ... but you don't need to mess with timer's at all. I just don't see the need, so please explain if I am mistaken ...

[ChrisA]

There's something called a "FOR LOOP". In this loop, you can specify how long it stays in the loop. You could increment a variable there if you wanted to 'wait' for a certain amount of time. Or, you could use what we like to call a "TIMER". Timers count time. Time can be used for waiting.

Maybe you should be a little more specific on what you're trying to do.

[deltacoder1020]

Originally Posted by ChrisA

There's something called a "FOR LOOP". In this loop, you can specify how long it stays in the loop. You could increment a variable there if you wanted to 'wait' for a certain amount of time. Or, you could use what we like to call a "TIMER". Timers count time. Time can be used for waiting.

Maybe you should be a little more specific on what you're trying to do.

but do remember that you need to call putdata every 26.2ms or so, or else the processor will shut down, which would not be a good thing in the middle of a match.

[Ryan M.]

Originally Posted by ChrisA

There's something called a "FOR LOOP". In this loop, you can specify how long it stays in the loop. You could increment a variable there if you wanted to 'wait' for a certain amount of time. Or, you could use what we like to call a "TIMER". Timers count time. Time can be used for waiting.

Maybe you should be a little more specific on what you're trying to do.

If you care, the struture of the for loop is this:

for(initiazation; test; increment)
{
    // body of loop
}

It is more flexible than that form indicates, but that would be the most common way to use it. A quick example of it actually being used as a "pause."

// Somewhere at the top
unsigned int i;

// Later on
for(i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
    // Do nothing
}

This code would cause it to loop ten times and then continue.

Note that if you were using this as a timer, it would be different at different battery charges as the controller would run slower.

Anyways, if anyone cares, there it is.

[jacob_dilles]

instead of going to sleep, i would count loops till the required delay has passed. stoping a program is a bad thing, just because of the way the program loop is structured. if that doesnt work, i would use a timer with an inturupt.

[KevinB]

Originally Posted by Texan

Note that if you were using this as a timer, it would be different at different battery charges as the controller would run slower.

Ken was right when he said that the timer will always run at the same speed. Texan probably meant that the motors being controlled by the timer would run slower ... which is true.

Getting back to the original focus of this post ... why do you want a sleep function? If you post the reason for your request for a sleep function, you'll probably get much better help.