RoboEmu 1.11beta1

[rbayer]

Originally posted by guzugi
I'm not sure if it this version, or if it's all, but it doesn't seem to support the "Toggle" command for feedback lights on the operator control.

You are correct. No toggle support yet.

[guzugi]

any idea if that would be in the next version (toggle) ? and when do you expect the next version?

also, let me just personally thank you because RoboEmu has saved me SO MUCH time! Now i can work on robot software AT HOME, without any robot, and know that when i put it on the bot, it will work perfectly, the first time!

THANK YOU!!!

[Joe Ross]

Originally posted by gwross
THAN. Have you been programming PBASIC too long?

I don't think that's the problem...just that it has been too long since I took Mrs. Ross's English Class


Back on topic...

I tried the timing on my windows 2000 machine, and it works fine. On the windows 98 machine, it runs too fast. Any ideas?

[rbayer]

Originally posted by Joe Ross

I tried the timing on my windows 2000 machine, and it works fine. On the windows 98 machine, it runs too fast. Any ideas?

That's very, very strange. On my computer, it seems to run 2x too slow. (ie 50ms/loop). I'm going to keep trying to fix it, but I'm not quite sure what's going on.

--Rob

[Joe Ross]

actually, I saw the 2x too slow when i ran it in wine...but I attributed that to wine, not the program.

[web-hed]

I agree with Steven Carmain. I am running my same program which is using the posted 38 loop count per second algorithm on emu 1.10 and 1.11 and there is a marked difference. My program runs much faster on 1.11. (Actually, under the 1.10, my program would run the 15 second loop in just under 18 seconds, anywhere between 17.6 and 17.9 seconds.)

Also, the serout from the default program I downloaded from the Innovation First site has to be adjusted by adding 4 instances of ",127" at the end of the serout command which makes the completely compliant with the comment that comes with the default code that talks about the SEROUT line.

Lastly, 1.11 keeps dying when I have bad code.

Also, if there is bad code and I get the standard "Would you like to quit?" and I say "No" then the file I just loaded get's locked so that I can't save it using the PBASIC editor. I have to kill RoboEmu to save the file. This is not too much of a problem when I am writing good code.

[Steven Carmain]

I used the code that I posted, and it still runs 2x fast, but runs fine in 1.10. My computer is an XP.

[rbayer]

Wow. Five days of no activity and this is already on the second page. Anyway, I'm going to try to finish up 1.11 tonight, so this is the last call for any bug reports, etc. Here's the current list:

Bugs:
Strange timing issues
Crashes if dividing by zero
Crashes with very long lines
Doesn't close file handle properly on errors
Falsely gives ELSE without IF in some instances (doesn't happen in 1.10)
comp_mode is backwards (I hadn't read the update from InnovationFirst at the time)


Proposed features:
Toggle
Arrays (::shudder:: may or may not happen until next beta release)
Single-step
More of the DEBUG modifiers (ie BIN8, etc)


Anything else? I'm going to start working on it around 8:00 tonight, so please let me know by then. As always, either post here or send me a PM/email.

[Jeff_Rice]

It does not detect errors with the number of initialization constants turned on not being the same as the number of things in the Serin.
This is important when you are making a timer.
Thank you for making RoboEmu, rbayer.

[guzugi]

well, for one thing, the toggle function might be nice...

but also...

i noticed some differences in the way that roboEmu and the true basic stamp interpret logic statements. I'm not sure what the problem is exactly, but in the example i had, if you have more than one operator in a series like this...

if [condition1] & [condition2] & [condition3] & [condition4] then
...

roboEmu does this the "correct" way, where ALL conditions have to be true, but this is not the case with the stamp interpreter. i've tries many combinations of parenthesis’ with varied results, but never the way i want them.

i guess i'm not sure what the problems is here, if it is roboEmu, or the stamp. Maybe i'm just have some syntax error, but i'll let you decide..

MEH

[rbayer]

The & is not the correct way to do it as it is meant for bitwise anding (like C's &). Use the keyword AND instead as it is like C's &&.

Hmmm... I'll see what I can do to make RoboEmu more correctly incorrect.


Anybody have anything else?


--Rob

[guzugi]

lol, THAT would fix it! thankyou!

by the way, what does the '&' operator do then?

[rbayer]

Originally posted by guzugi
lol, THAT would fix it! thankyou!

by the way, what does the '&' operator do then?

It performs an AND on each bit. Likewise, the | performs an OR and ~ performs a NOT. Examples:

  110111001 
& 010101011
----------------
  010101001


  110111001 
| 010101011
----------------
  110111011


~110111001 
----------------
 001000110

You should always use the keywords OR, AND, and NOT when combining expressions (ie IF NOT (p1_y <137 AND p1_y>117)) and only use the bitwise versions when you really know what you are doing.


Any other RoboEmu comments from anyone? I'm off to robotics in a few minutes, but should still be able to work on stuff later tonight.

--Rob

[guzugi]

another thing that would be nice is to have indicators for port feedback lights...such as "out12, out13, etc"

just an idea

eric

[Dan]

RoboEmu properly reports if the gosub depth is too great. However, if you fix the problem in your code, save it and have RoboEmu reload it, the depth is still reported as incorrect. RoboEmu must be exited and restarted.