Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [beam] BEAM and PICAXE

Expand Messages
  • Connor Ramsey
    HELLO AGAIN!!! I ve been gone on this group since late last year, and that s partly because of some things I won t bring up, and the other is that I ve been
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 4, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      HELLO AGAIN!!! I've been gone on this group since late last year, and that's partly because of some things I won't bring up, and the other is that I've been learning a lot about computers. If you remember some of the slightly overcritical things I've said about digital robotics in the past, well that's just because I didn't know what I was missing out on. I now have come to the understanding that neither pure analog nor pure digital control is the future of robotics in general. Like I commented to Lee on his PICAXE walker, while digital alone can be effective, it does take a considerable amount of resources for the processor to be able to keep up with even a mere master-slave bicore. However, a bicore is utterly incapable of the tasks that the processor is specially designed for. The real purpose of BEAM, ultimately, is to take a substantial load off of the robot's logic processor, so that the program only has to worry about peripheral things like actuator states, sensor inputs, timing, and conditions. Another thing that BEAM has only made baby steps in that computers excel at is memorization. Also, I'm writing this on July 4th night so it's kind of diffucult to focus on what I'm writing.XD.
      Enjoy, Connor

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.