11-29-2017 06:21 AM
11-29-2017 03:23 PM
@Blokk wrote:
From here:
I had to stare at that far longer than I should have to figure out what was going on.
11-30-2017 03:19 AM
@BowenM wrote:
@Blokk wrote:
From here:
I had to stare at that far longer than I should have to figure out what was going on.
It's not that bad. Just replace the two Booleans, two shift register, the AND, the selector and the 7 wires for a "First Call?". So 7 nodes, 7 wires replaced by 1 node and 0 wires? Yes, that's Rube Goldberg Code alright!
Somehow that one pixel jump in the top wire (on the right) bothers me more then in should.
11-30-2017 03:29 AM
wiebe@CARYA wrote:
It's not that bad. Just replace the two Booleans, two shift register, the AND, the selector and the 7 wires for a "First Call?". So 7 nodes, 7 wires replaced by 1 node and 0 wires?
Actually, it looks like you still need the feedback node, because the point is to check the current time against the start time. One option would be to use the FN and select. Another might be to use just the FN and set it to initialize on first call, then wire the current time to the init terminal and the output back to the input.
11-30-2017 03:34 AM - edited 11-30-2017 03:39 AM
@tst wrote:
wiebe@CARYA wrote:
It's not that bad. Just replace the two Booleans, two shift register, the AND, the selector and the 7 wires for a "First Call?". So 7 nodes, 7 wires replaced by 1 node and 0 wires?
Actually, it looks like you still need the feedback node, because the point is to check the current time against the start time.
Yes, one. The other two are redundant.
But the First Call? is indeed not needed, as it's function is build in the FB.
12-05-2017 08:31 AM
Let's wait for a period of time, in 10 msec chunks, but the number of times to wait is based on a arithmetic series.
While loop near bottom after VISA Write
12-05-2017 08:38 AM
@RavensFan wrote:
Is that uninitialized shift register a bug or a feature?
12-05-2017 08:42 AM
that is the rube goldebergish part 😉
12-05-2017 08:58 AM - edited 12-05-2017 08:58 AM
@jwscs wrote:
that is the rube goldebergish part 😉
Why (just covering myself...)?
That's a very efficient way to wait ~500 ms the first time, and then until the next 10 ms multiple forever after.
It could a bug or a feature. In the last case it's programmed pretty efficiently.
12-05-2017 09:02 AM
i was just kidding regarding the uninitialized shift register