I was attempting to use the new PBASIC 2.5 Compiler, but when I attempted to load the program, well any program, to the robot, the compiler would abort and say that there was no STAMP detected. :ahh:
I have also tried to download to a normal STAMP stack, that also failed. I can use the old compiler to load programs fine.
I ensured that all the syntax were correct and that both 2SX and PBASIC 2.5 were declared.
It be great if someone could help, I really really REALLY REALLY want to use those new commands.
Several other people have reported this with the alpha version that Innovation FIRST posted.
Are you still using that one, or are you using the beta version that Parallax posted (and is now on Innovation FIRST’s site)?
My team has decided to use the old compiler, as we don’t want to take any risks using a beta compiler. The old syntax has been good enough for as long as I’ve been building FIRST robots
*Originally posted by Joe Ross *
**My team has decided to use the old compiler, as we don’t want to take any risks using a beta compiler. The old syntax has been good enough for as long as I’ve been building FIRST robots **
I agree, there seems to be a lot of hype about 2.5, but I don’t see where it’s going to me that much of a change.
RoboCards is using PBASIC v1.33 Editor. There’s no point in using the newer one, since it isn’t even a full-release (it’s an alpha release, very buggy)
*Originally posted by Jeremy_Mc *
**but the flexibility of the language is greatly increased in my opinion…it’s much easier to debug too.
*jeremy **
Actually, it depends on the simplisticy (sp?) of your robot. If you got all the works on it, then yea…I’d go with 2.5 to. But since we are using some beat-down robot from 10 years ago, we are using 2.
I’ve only found one bug in the alpha editor… if I use the DEBUG function on the stamp and close the debug window, I get the blue screen of death in reference to some serial driver No such prob with the 1.33. I’ve been too scared to test it with the beta. But then again, who needs to debug, anyways? Code should be done right the first time. If it has some extra “features”, then you can just charge the end user more $$ 8)
BSOD under XP is a scary sight… I’ve only seen 6 of them in my life, all when I was programming our bot.
It seems to know what kind of Stamp it’s trying to find, but it is not smart enough to distinguish between “I can’t find a specfic Stamp” and “I can’t find any Stamps”. Or maybe it just take the time to test for all possible Stamps : “You have a 2se on com3, and an sp on 4, but you ain’t got no bs2sxs, today !”
BTW - I wrote to Parallax about 1.33b, and they got back to me quickly, with a fix, and we traded one more time, during which they showed their concern and provided an answer. Thanks, Parallax !
*Originally posted by Lloyd Burns *
**Have you told it that you have a Stamp bs2sx ?
It seems to know what kind of Stamp it’s trying to find, but it is not smart enough to distinguish between “I can’t find a specfic Stamp” and “I can’t find any Stamps”. Or maybe it just take the time to test for all possible Stamps : “You have a 2se on com3, and an sp on 4, but you ain’t got no bs2sxs, today !”
BTW - I wrote to Parallax about 1.33b, and they got back to me quickly, with a fix, and we traded one more time, during which they showed their concern and provided an answer. Thanks, Parallax ! **
I think it might deal with the COM Port connections actually, but I’m probably wrong (I haven’t done any PBASIC in like, 3 weeks).
No such prob with the 1.33. I’ve been too scared to test it with the beta. But then again, who needs to debug, anyways? Code should be done right the first time. If it has some extra “features”, then you can just charge the end user more $$ 8)