Re: [oopic] Question about event design

Excellent, then I shan't bother with that route any longer. The pity of it is
that I may have discarded the working code I had for the non-VC route.

ooPIC Tech Support wrote:
>
> I wouldn't bother to make the compares in a VC - You are correct,
> reading the I2C and then putting the data into variables takes enough
> time that you won't see any particular speed improvement by trying to
> make them an oCompare VC.
>
> DLC
>
> Shaggy wrote:
>> I'm running into an issue where I might run out of object memory, so I
>> have
>> to choose what to build as a virtual circuit, and what I should just
>> leave
>> in code. I have two motors that run based on a countdown timer. I set the
>> value of the countdown object, and the motors run until the countdown
>> reaches 0. There are also 24 touch switches. My intention is that if one
>> of
>> the switches is triggered, the countdown value is set to 0, thereby
>> switching off the motors immediately. I was figuring that this "reflex"
>> should be among the fastest things to happen, so I thought I might create
>> a
>> VC for the switches. However, the switches are read from an I2C object,
>> and
>> those can't be included in a VC directly. Therefore, I thought I would
>> read
>> the three banks of switches into three bytes (I have to do this anyways,
>> because I need the bytes). Then the VC would use three oCompare0 objects
>> to
>> check whether any of the bytes are above 0. An oGate3 object will OR the
>> three oCompare0.Above properties and trigger an oEvent based on whether
>> the
>> oGate3 results in True or False.
>>
>> However, the event triggered by the oEvent clears the counters, and sends
>> some information out the serial port. None of that is VC, but it has to
>> happen. It would be a bit more difficult to try to put the clearing of
>> the
>> countdown timer into the VC, and I'm already pushing the limit of the
>> object
>> memory, so I didn't seriously consider doing it.
>>
>> My problem is that even this VC is gobbling up about 20 bytes, or about
>> 25%
>> of the object memory, which appears to be acceptable, though only
>> marginally
>> so. I don't have the event quite working yet (v B2.2+, so I don't have
>> the C
>> oEvent bug), but I'm uncertain whether it's even worth doing. Considering
>> that reading the I2C into the three bytes is not part of the VC, and that
>> the event itself, where the countdown is cleared (in certain situations
>> only, so there are two if statements prior to the clearing of the value),
>> is
>> not part of the VC, will I actually see much of a speed boost versus the
>> single line:
>>
>> if alert1 > 0 or alert2 > 0 or alert3 > 0
>>
>> which is all I am really replacing with the three oCompare objects and
>> the
>> oEvent.
>>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Dennis Clark ooPIC Tech Support
> www.oopic.com
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Question-about-event-design-tp16385531p16389938.html
Sent from the OOPic mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oopic/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/oopic/join

(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:oopic-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:oopic-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
oopic-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/