That's a far reaching generalization to call that methodology anything like
systembuilder.
For a long time, I've shared a similar mentality to Barry's whereby it
irritates me to no end how juvenile and immature the AV programming
community as a whole is (I concede that there are obvious exceptions, but
for the case of this argument let's assume I'm right).
If you look at ANY other software industry and compare it to ours, the
contradictions are glaring. Why? Because we tend to cling to the silly
notion that we're "different" because we deal with A/V and archaic
proprietary RS-232 protocols and such....
The reality is that we're no different. We produce computer software. We
write code. We build graphical user interfaces. Guess what? We're not
exactly pioneers here....
I think it was Nathan in the thread about locked code/modules lately that
made a statement that brought a smile to my face and gave me hope. The
world of PC programming discovered years ago that protecting common code
that almost every one of their competitors was using wasn't making them
more competitive or profitable and that it was far more beneficial to
themselves, and the industry as a whole, to share such code amongst each
other. These days, most PC programmers rarely write anything truly
original, instead they use OOP libraries and class modules to adapt for
their purposes. The originality, profitability and ingenuity comes in
combining them in some new and more effective way that advances the
efficiency or capability of the software. It's pretty hard to get to that
point if you have to start from scratch and write everything yourself.
With a solid foundation (i.e. Andriod OS) that is developed and improved in
a open source environment, there is still a TON of room and market to build
innovative profitable products.
I watch my own team of ~10 programmers constantly each spend hours trying
to solve the same problem on their own. While I value each person's
approach and don't really have an opinion on which way is better as long as
the finished product is the same, it's terribly inefficient for the company
and themselves. What AV programmers need to realize is that we would all
make more money and do less work if we behaved more like the rest of the
programming world. Find the common problems and scenarios, solve them
generically, efficiently and in a way that is reusable in as many
situations as possible and instead spend your time and effort on the
problems and scenarios that are uncommon or adding new features that add
value.
</rant...>
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:20 PM, matt_rasmussen_2000 <mjrtoo@...>wrote: **
So you want to write another systembuilder?
--- In Crestron@..., Barry Newton <barry@...> wrote:
You know, this really gets at programming technique which is something
Crestron has always stayed out of. They offer best practices for specific
situations sometimes, but overall architecture is absent. So like most
programmers with experience, I have my own approach I use over and over.
There are a lot of unpaid hours that went into it, but that time is
recovered in being able to produce finished programs more quickly.
I suspect most programmers eventually abandon timed logic for the most
part and begin thinking in terms of logic wave pulses and wave delays where
that sort of thing is needed. I know I spend an unhealthy amount of time
tweaking logic just to reduce the number of symbols.
I have wondered if there is interest in the community in creating a
standard architecture for program design, something like an open source
project. In my mind the focus would be creating an overall architecture
with cut-and-paste-ready logic modules with well defined standard
interfaces. There are a lot of device modules in the files section, but I
haven't seen a lot other than that, and there is no standardization at all
really.
Maybe most of you have too much invested in your own approaches to want
to share techniques, even I'm not sure I want to do that, but it won't hurt
to discuss it.
Sorry to hijack the thread.
Barry
On Apr 12, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Steve Kaudle wrote:
To some extent that's dependent on the display's in question (or more
specifically, the completeness of their control API's). Lets assume
that the displays can either be queried and/or will provide
unsolicited
feedback for the current power state (off, warming, on, or cooling).
Given that, I'd write a module that would always tell me the current
power status, and if either of the display's 'warming_fb' outputs were
high, activate the subpage.
On 4/12/2012 6:32 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
Thanks Steve,
Then how would a person create the following condition?
Display A + B can be powered up separately, but depending on what
source has been selected they both may or may not need to be powered up at
the same time. And here is the kicker, they both have different warm up
times, and the "system is warming up" page needs to be held high during the
power up cycle.
So if A takes 10s to warm up, but has been powered up at the same
time as B (which takes 20s), the warm up page needs to be high for 20s.
--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle<crestron@> wrote:
From a more abstract/best practices standpoint, you should try to
keep
the amount of timed events (steppers, delays, one-shots, etc...) you
use
to a minimum. That said, I'd bet you'd need to use a>lot< of steppers
before the burden they put on system would be perceived by the
operator. Lots of variables at play and the real world threshold will
likely vary (greatly) from system to system. Note that the previous
statement(s) should most defiantly not be translated into anything
like
'stop using timed events if you want your systems to work right'.
From a logical/program flow standpoint, I prefer to avoid timed
events
and build logic that is condition dependent. Example: I don't
necessarily want to send an input swap command to a projector based
on a
specific amount of time having passed, but rather based on real-time
conditions like the (actual) power state and current input selection.
On 4/12/2012 5:56 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
I know there are several ways to skin a cat in Crestron world, and
I am always looking at improving and following best practices. Having said
that I have a question.
Is it bad to have 2 or 3 steppers running concurrently? Depending
on the device being used, I like to have a stepper handle the procedure.
For example, source is selected, stepper for projector 1 is
triggered, this fires up the proj and sends down the screen, whilst
indicating the system is warming up.
If a different source is selected, it might be destined for other
displays, which in turn will trigger their respective steppers.
So there might be a few steppers running at the same time.
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in
the Database area.
Yahoo!
Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in
the Database area.
Yahoo!
Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the
Database area.
Yahoo!
Groups Links
|
Re: Best way to widen my programming ablility
For programming generally... in my experience just play with things: I have Crestron in my home not because it's cool (ok, not _only_ because its cool) but because I can try things without worrying about pissing people off* or wasting billable time or...
Don't be afraid to attempt to reinvent the wheel. Sometimes it will work poorly, sometimes it will work well, sometimes it won't work at all. Worst case it helps you to understand why "the way we've always done it" is the way you should continue to do it.
For onsite... don't limit yourself to active sawmills. For the best variety also consider hiring someone to
a) Test the fire alarm for hours at a time (alternate between just a temporal 3 horn and voice evacuation for maximum effect)
b) Hit the main circuit breaker for the building you're in, run into the room and tell you that they're "just testing the generator...the power won't be off for more than a half hour or so". Have him turn the circuit breaker on without any warning after about an hour. Then turn it off again after 5 minutes with no explanation.
c) Find someone doing renovations and have them sand drywall no more than 6 feet away from where you're working.
d) Send random college students, homeless, or wayward tourists in to ask you inane questions that have nothing to do with the project at random intervals (bonus points if you can find someone with the impeccable timing to pop in just as you finally think you've figured out something weird)
e) (More for multi-room systems than single-room systems) Try to work in such a way that anyone using the system can continue using the system without even noticing you're working on a different part of the system.
Lincoln
[* -- My girlfriend used to think my house is a sentient being and jealous of her. I think I've convinced her otherwise but...]
--
Lincoln King-Cliby, CTS
Sr. Systems Architect | Crestron Certified Programmer (Silver)
ControlWorks Consulting, LLC
V: 440.449.1100 x1107 | F: 440.449.1106 | I:
Crestron Authorized Independent Programmer
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-----Original Message----- From: Crestron@... [mailto:Crestron@...] On Behalf Of matt_rasmussen_2000 Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 2:36 PM To: Crestron@... Subject: [Crestron] Re: Best way to widen my programming ablility
There's no substitute for practice... to make it more realistic, be
sure you sit on a 5-gallon bucket in an active sawmill and give
yourself a deadline of 15 minutes until the CEO's presentation starts.
Too true, too true... ------------------------------------ Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers. A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area. Yahoo! Groups Links
|
Re: OT: Polycom HDX8000 w/BSS AEC but using analog dialer in the HDX8000 question
It's a real analog line or a module who convert an ip extension into an analog extension. i have seen this in the past and it was cause by the device who create the analog line.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In Crestron@..., "matt_rasmussen_2000" <mjrtoo@...> wrote:
For some reason I've been assigned the task of figuring out this issue and wondering if someone here can help out real quick.
An older Vortex system was replaced with BSS and a new HDX8000, but the engineer didn't understand that the old EF2241 had an analog phone dialer and didn't include one in the BSS (used the BLU-101 instead of the 102). So, they are using the analog phone input of the HDX8000 to dial those calls. As far as programming goes, it's working fine, but it appears that the analog phone calls are half-duplex, so if someone is talking in the local room, or, an audio source is playing, the far site on the phone call cannot be heard or interrupt the local conversation. The video conference audio is just fine, full duplex communication etc. The BSS is currently setup to do the AEC processing in the system and the AEC is off in the codec.
I guess I don't understand why the analog phone would be any different than the video conference audio coming out of the codec and processed by the BSS? I've looked through the menus of the codec to look for any settings for the analog dialer, but I can't see anything that would set it up for half duplex. Or, maybe the dialer in the HDX8000 is just half-duplex?
|
OT: Polycom HDX8000 w/BSS AEC but using analog dialer in the HDX8000 question
For some reason I've been assigned the task of figuring out this issue and wondering if someone here can help out real quick.
An older Vortex system was replaced with BSS and a new HDX8000, but the engineer didn't understand that the old EF2241 had an analog phone dialer and didn't include one in the BSS (used the BLU-101 instead of the 102). So, they are using the analog phone input of the HDX8000 to dial those calls. As far as programming goes, it's working fine, but it appears that the analog phone calls are half-duplex, so if someone is talking in the local room, or, an audio source is playing, the far site on the phone call cannot be heard or interrupt the local conversation. The video conference audio is just fine, full duplex communication etc. The BSS is currently setup to do the AEC processing in the system and the AEC is off in the codec.
I guess I don't understand why the analog phone would be any different than the video conference audio coming out of the codec and processed by the BSS? I've looked through the menus of the codec to look for any settings for the analog dialer, but I can't see anything that would set it up for half duplex. Or, maybe the dialer in the HDX8000 is just half-duplex?
|
No, I'm not thinking a code generator or any type of automated tool. I'm thinking more a framework of standards programmers could develop and agree to follow so that different programmers could develop functional blocks that interoperate. I suspect just getting agreement on some big issues would be difficult (like TP-room-device vs. TP-device), but it might be worth doing.
If you were just kidding with that question, ha ha, good one ;-).
Barry
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 13, 2012, at 2:20 PM, matt_rasmussen_2000 wrote: So you want to write another systembuilder?
--- In Crestron@..., Barry Newton <barry@...> wrote:
You know, this really gets at programming technique which is something Crestron has always stayed out of. They offer best practices for specific situations sometimes, but overall architecture is absent. So like most programmers with experience, I have my own approach I use over and over. There are a lot of unpaid hours that went into it, but that time is recovered in being able to produce finished programs more quickly.
I suspect most programmers eventually abandon timed logic for the most part and begin thinking in terms of logic wave pulses and wave delays where that sort of thing is needed. I know I spend an unhealthy amount of time tweaking logic just to reduce the number of symbols.
I have wondered if there is interest in the community in creating a standard architecture for program design, something like an open source project. In my mind the focus would be creating an overall architecture with cut-and-paste-ready logic modules with well defined standard interfaces. There are a lot of device modules in the files section, but I haven't seen a lot other than that, and there is no standardization at all really.
Maybe most of you have too much invested in your own approaches to want to share techniques, even I'm not sure I want to do that, but it won't hurt to discuss it.
Sorry to hijack the thread.
Barry
On Apr 12, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Steve Kaudle wrote:
To some extent that's dependent on the display's in question (or more
specifically, the completeness of their control API's). Lets assume
that the displays can either be queried and/or will provide unsolicited
feedback for the current power state (off, warming, on, or cooling).
Given that, I'd write a module that would always tell me the current
power status, and if either of the display's 'warming_fb' outputs were
high, activate the subpage.
On 4/12/2012 6:32 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
Thanks Steve,
Then how would a person create the following condition?
Display A + B can be powered up separately, but depending on what source has been selected they both may or may not need to be powered up at the same time. And here is the kicker, they both have different warm up times, and the "system is warming up" page needs to be held high during the power up cycle.
So if A takes 10s to warm up, but has been powered up at the same time as B (which takes 20s), the warm up page needs to be high for 20s.
--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle<crestron@> wrote:
From a more abstract/best practices standpoint, you should try to keep
the amount of timed events (steppers, delays, one-shots, etc...) you use
to a minimum. That said, I'd bet you'd need to use a>lot< of steppers
before the burden they put on system would be perceived by the
operator. Lots of variables at play and the real world threshold will
likely vary (greatly) from system to system. Note that the previous
statement(s) should most defiantly not be translated into anything like
'stop using timed events if you want your systems to work right'.
From a logical/program flow standpoint, I prefer to avoid timed events
and build logic that is condition dependent. Example: I don't
necessarily want to send an input swap command to a projector based on a
specific amount of time having passed, but rather based on real-time
conditions like the (actual) power state and current input selection.
On 4/12/2012 5:56 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
I know there are several ways to skin a cat in Crestron world, and I am always looking at improving and following best practices. Having said that I have a question.
Is it bad to have 2 or 3 steppers running concurrently? Depending on the device being used, I like to have a stepper handle the procedure.
For example, source is selected, stepper for projector 1 is triggered, this fires up the proj and sends down the screen, whilst indicating the system is warming up.
If a different source is selected, it might be destined for other displays, which in turn will trigger their respective steppers.
So there might be a few steppers running at the same time.
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
Re: Best way to widen my programming ablility
Best "learn to program" website I've ever seen is www.codeyear.com The best
part is there is NO videos!!
Mark
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 1:48 PM, coreygsimpson <coreygsimpson@...>wrote: **
I have been programming for a few years but have not been in a position to
do it full time, I am really a lead install tech that can also program. I
would like some input from the group on how to widen my programming
abilities. It would seem like most of the things learned would come
necessity. what i mean by that is that I learn how to program code for a
specific piece of gear because I need to for a job. But what are some thing
I could do to basically prep myself for upcoming needs? Any input would be
appreciated.
|
Re: Best way to widen my programming ablility
"Handy reference here: Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years: Now that was a good read lol. I'm a long time student of the school of hard knocks, and a proud University dropout.... -Neil On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Jeremy Weatherford <xidus.net@...>wrote: **
Handy reference here: Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years:
Specific to Crestron, make sure you get to training classes, as they
will teach you things that are difficult to learn on your own. Get
your own processor (QM-RMC or DIN-AP2) if you don't already have one
to test things on. Get familiar with Debugger, explore existing
programs in it and make sure you really understand how they work, and
not just what they do. Read the SIMPL Primer and the symbol help
files. Make sure you know what all the symbols in the symbol library
do -- that will come in handy some day when you're saying "I know
there's a symbol that does X..." even if you don't remember exactly
what it's called. Many of the more complex symbol help topics also
give examples of how you might use them. If you're not sure how
something works, write a little test program so you can poke the
symbol in Debugger and see what happens.
Learn to read protocol documents... I enjoy when people post questions
about protocols on this group, because, time permitting, I try to
decipher the protocol myself, whether or not I can answer their actual
question. The more protocol documents I decipher, the easier it is to
interpret new protocols.
Identify your weak spots and start practicing with them. Crosspoints?
SIMPL+? Serial parsing in SIMPL? Analog logic? Modules?
Hex/ASCII/decimal data formats? Page flip logic? What are some
things that you might be asked to add to a program that would be
useful to practice beforehand? Timeserver synchronization? XPanels?
iPads? Lamp hours? Countdown timer for a presenter?
Weather/news/stock tickers?
There's no substitute for practice... to make it more realistic, be
sure you sit on a 5-gallon bucket in an active sawmill and give
yourself a deadline of 15 minutes until the CEO's presentation starts.
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 1:48 PM, coreygsimpson <coreygsimpson@...>
wrote:
I have been programming for a few years but have not been in a position to do it full time, I am really a lead install tech that can also program.
I would like some input from the group on how to widen my programming
abilities. It would seem like most of the things learned would come
necessity. what i mean by that is that I learn how to program code for a
specific piece of gear because I need to for a job. But what are some thing
I could do to basically prep myself for upcoming needs? Any input would be
appreciated.
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the
Database area.
Yahoo!
Groups Links
--
Jeremy Weatherford
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
Yes, i've done this in the past to monitoring a device.
you could write a little program to be able to change the communication setting and your all set. With a xpanel to adjust each parameter and update it live.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In Crestron@..., "avsystemdesign" <avsystemdesign@...> wrote:
I want to see the commands been sent from a controller, then copy those strings to use from Crestron.
You suggesting running the controller through the com ports on a processor (QM-RMC, connect A to B), and look at the traffic?
--- In Crestron@..., "Raph Paf" <raphael.thiffault@> wrote:
What do you mean ?
a nice qm-rmc :P
--- In Crestron@..., "avsystemdesign" <avsystemdesign@> wrote:
Can anyone recommend a good serial port sniffer?
|
Re: Best way to widen my programming ablility
--- In Crestron@..., "coreygsimpson" <coreygsimpson@...> wrote:
I have been programming for a few years but have not been in a position to do it full time, I am really a lead install tech that can also program. I would like some input from the group on how to widen my programming abilities. It would seem like most of the things learned would come necessity. what i mean by that is that I learn how to program code for a specific piece of gear because I need to for a job. But what are some thing I could do to basically prep myself for upcoming needs? Any input would be appreciated.
If you haven't dealt much with analog symbols I would start learning them. I program as much in analog as possible. It provides more power and flexibility. For instance, I NEVER use interlocks anymore. I use an init and equate. It's extra symbols but you can then take that analog value and use it in other places in your program. I would also learn to understand truth tables. I've seen some pretty nasty truth table logic from programmers that don't fully grasp how it works. Like running an output of TT back into itself to reset or something. Bad juju! Once you get a good understanding of analog symbols and TT's then you can start to focus on SIMPL+.
|
Re: Best way to widen my programming ablility
There's no substitute for practice... to make it more realistic, be
sure you sit on a 5-gallon bucket in an active sawmill and give
yourself a deadline of 15 minutes until the CEO's presentation starts.
Too true, too true...
|
D3 Pro with CLI-120n modules?
Is there a way to add the CLI-120n-4 modules to D3 pro? ive been using simpl windows to control the modules but am interested in using d3 pro since i have a spare processor i could use for strictly lighting control and wouldnt have to worry about all my lights flashing every time i make a change to my main processor and wanted the benefits of all the built in logic for lighting. Thanks for any information.
JCAT
|
Re: Best way to widen my programming ablility
Handy reference here: Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years: Specific to Crestron, make sure you get to training classes, as they will teach you things that are difficult to learn on your own. Get your own processor (QM-RMC or DIN-AP2) if you don't already have one to test things on. Get familiar with Debugger, explore existing programs in it and make sure you really understand how they work, and not just what they do. Read the SIMPL Primer and the symbol help files. Make sure you know what all the symbols in the symbol library do -- that will come in handy some day when you're saying "I know there's a symbol that does X..." even if you don't remember exactly what it's called. Many of the more complex symbol help topics also give examples of how you might use them. If you're not sure how something works, write a little test program so you can poke the symbol in Debugger and see what happens. Learn to read protocol documents... I enjoy when people post questions about protocols on this group, because, time permitting, I try to decipher the protocol myself, whether or not I can answer their actual question. The more protocol documents I decipher, the easier it is to interpret new protocols. Identify your weak spots and start practicing with them. Crosspoints? SIMPL+? Serial parsing in SIMPL? Analog logic? Modules? Hex/ASCII/decimal data formats? Page flip logic? What are some things that you might be asked to add to a program that would be useful to practice beforehand? Timeserver synchronization? XPanels? iPads? Lamp hours? Countdown timer for a presenter? Weather/news/stock tickers? There's no substitute for practice... to make it more realistic, be sure you sit on a 5-gallon bucket in an active sawmill and give yourself a deadline of 15 minutes until the CEO's presentation starts. On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 1:48 PM, coreygsimpson <coreygsimpson@...> wrote: I have been programming for a few years but have not been in a position to do it full time, I am really a lead install tech that can also program. I would like some input from the group on how to widen my programming abilities. It would seem like most of the things learned would come necessity. what i mean by that is that I learn how to program code for a specific piece of gear because I need to for a job. But what are some thing I could do to basically prep myself for upcoming needs? Any input would be appreciated.
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
-- Jeremy Weatherford
|
So you want to write another systembuilder?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In Crestron@..., Barry Newton <barry@...> wrote:
You know, this really gets at programming technique which is something Crestron has always stayed out of. They offer best practices for specific situations sometimes, but overall architecture is absent. So like most programmers with experience, I have my own approach I use over and over. There are a lot of unpaid hours that went into it, but that time is recovered in being able to produce finished programs more quickly.
I suspect most programmers eventually abandon timed logic for the most part and begin thinking in terms of logic wave pulses and wave delays where that sort of thing is needed. I know I spend an unhealthy amount of time tweaking logic just to reduce the number of symbols.
I have wondered if there is interest in the community in creating a standard architecture for program design, something like an open source project. In my mind the focus would be creating an overall architecture with cut-and-paste-ready logic modules with well defined standard interfaces. There are a lot of device modules in the files section, but I haven't seen a lot other than that, and there is no standardization at all really.
Maybe most of you have too much invested in your own approaches to want to share techniques, even I'm not sure I want to do that, but it won't hurt to discuss it.
Sorry to hijack the thread.
Barry
On Apr 12, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Steve Kaudle wrote:
To some extent that's dependent on the display's in question (or more
specifically, the completeness of their control API's). Lets assume
that the displays can either be queried and/or will provide unsolicited
feedback for the current power state (off, warming, on, or cooling).
Given that, I'd write a module that would always tell me the current
power status, and if either of the display's 'warming_fb' outputs were
high, activate the subpage.
On 4/12/2012 6:32 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
Thanks Steve,
Then how would a person create the following condition?
Display A + B can be powered up separately, but depending on what source has been selected they both may or may not need to be powered up at the same time. And here is the kicker, they both have different warm up times, and the "system is warming up" page needs to be held high during the power up cycle.
So if A takes 10s to warm up, but has been powered up at the same time as B (which takes 20s), the warm up page needs to be high for 20s.
--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle<crestron@> wrote:
From a more abstract/best practices standpoint, you should try to keep
the amount of timed events (steppers, delays, one-shots, etc...) you use
to a minimum. That said, I'd bet you'd need to use a>lot< of steppers
before the burden they put on system would be perceived by the
operator. Lots of variables at play and the real world threshold will
likely vary (greatly) from system to system. Note that the previous
statement(s) should most defiantly not be translated into anything like
'stop using timed events if you want your systems to work right'.
From a logical/program flow standpoint, I prefer to avoid timed events
and build logic that is condition dependent. Example: I don't
necessarily want to send an input swap command to a projector based on a
specific amount of time having passed, but rather based on real-time
conditions like the (actual) power state and current input selection.
On 4/12/2012 5:56 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
I know there are several ways to skin a cat in Crestron world, and I am always looking at improving and following best practices. Having said that I have a question.
Is it bad to have 2 or 3 steppers running concurrently? Depending on the device being used, I like to have a stepper handle the procedure.
For example, source is selected, stepper for projector 1 is triggered, this fires up the proj and sends down the screen, whilst indicating the system is warming up.
If a different source is selected, it might be destined for other displays, which in turn will trigger their respective steppers.
So there might be a few steppers running at the same time.
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
So it goes both ways I see. :)
Though buffers have their place, there are many times when buffers are so much easier than breaking out crosspoints that it makes sense to use them. It depends upon the circumstance, 'going back to buffers' is a little generic. If you're saying that people don't use crosspoints when you're connecting multiple panels to devices with all signal types in play, then I'd agree that not using crosspoints, and not even looking at them, is an issue.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In Crestron@..., "jgreenink16" <jgreenink16@...> wrote:
I just yesterday sat with one of the other programmers here for an hour to try to standardize things here and basically got nowhere, and we're just three programmers. It drives the owner nuts, but we're programmers and almost if it goes hand in hand, have egos. I once worked at a company for just two weeks: Try telling someone who's been programming for 12 years (self taught, not a single class) that there's a better way to do things. Resentment doesn't even begin to describe it. I quit because (among other things) there was no way in hell I was going to go back to buffers after doing crosspoints.
/rant
--- In Crestron@..., Barry Newton <barry@> wrote:
You know, this really gets at programming technique which is something Crestron has always stayed out of. They offer best practices for specific situations sometimes, but overall architecture is absent. So like most programmers with experience, I have my own approach I use over and over. There are a lot of unpaid hours that went into it, but that time is recovered in being able to produce finished programs more quickly.
I suspect most programmers eventually abandon timed logic for the most part and begin thinking in terms of logic wave pulses and wave delays where that sort of thing is needed. I know I spend an unhealthy amount of time tweaking logic just to reduce the number of symbols.
I have wondered if there is interest in the community in creating a standard architecture for program design, something like an open source project. In my mind the focus would be creating an overall architecture with cut-and-paste-ready logic modules with well defined standard interfaces. There are a lot of device modules in the files section, but I haven't seen a lot other than that, and there is no standardization at all really.
Maybe most of you have too much invested in your own approaches to want to share techniques, even I'm not sure I want to do that, but it won't hurt to discuss it.
Sorry to hijack the thread.
Barry
On Apr 12, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Steve Kaudle wrote:
To some extent that's dependent on the display's in question (or more
specifically, the completeness of their control API's). Lets assume
that the displays can either be queried and/or will provide unsolicited
feedback for the current power state (off, warming, on, or cooling).
Given that, I'd write a module that would always tell me the current
power status, and if either of the display's 'warming_fb' outputs were
high, activate the subpage.
On 4/12/2012 6:32 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
Thanks Steve,
Then how would a person create the following condition?
Display A + B can be powered up separately, but depending on what source has been selected they both may or may not need to be powered up at the same time. And here is the kicker, they both have different warm up times, and the "system is warming up" page needs to be held high during the power up cycle.
So if A takes 10s to warm up, but has been powered up at the same time as B (which takes 20s), the warm up page needs to be high for 20s.
--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle<crestron@> wrote:
From a more abstract/best practices standpoint, you should try to keep
the amount of timed events (steppers, delays, one-shots, etc...) you use
to a minimum. That said, I'd bet you'd need to use a>lot< of steppers
before the burden they put on system would be perceived by the
operator. Lots of variables at play and the real world threshold will
likely vary (greatly) from system to system. Note that the previous
statement(s) should most defiantly not be translated into anything like
'stop using timed events if you want your systems to work right'.
From a logical/program flow standpoint, I prefer to avoid timed events
and build logic that is condition dependent. Example: I don't
necessarily want to send an input swap command to a projector based on a
specific amount of time having passed, but rather based on real-time
conditions like the (actual) power state and current input selection.
On 4/12/2012 5:56 PM, avsystemdesign wrote:
I know there are several ways to skin a cat in Crestron world, and I am always looking at improving and following best practices. Having said that I have a question.
Is it bad to have 2 or 3 steppers running concurrently? Depending on the device being used, I like to have a stepper handle the procedure.
For example, source is selected, stepper for projector 1 is triggered, this fires up the proj and sends down the screen, whilst indicating the system is warming up.
If a different source is selected, it might be destined for other displays, which in turn will trigger their respective steppers.
So there might be a few steppers running at the same time.
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
I seem to have had more IR problems with the DVR versions than the non-DVR
ones. Gaffer's tape + a pinhole helped.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Apr 13, 2012 9:29 AM, "Heath Volmer" <hvolmer@...> wrote: The only trouble I've ever had with these is placement and type of IR
emitter. Some of them were really finicky.
Also, do you have the remote settings on "IR" instead of "RF"?
Heath Volmer
Digital Domain Systems
(303) 517-9714
On Apr 13, 2012, at 6:50 AM, Jeffrey wrote:
Has anyone had trouble getting IR control to work with a DirecTV box.
I believe the model is H20. I have tried learning commands, using crestron module so far nothing. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Jeff
------------------------------------
Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.
A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the
Database area.
Yahoo!
Groups Links
|
Best way to widen my programming ablility
I have been programming for a few years but have not been in a position to do it full time, I am really a lead install tech that can also program. I would like some input from the group on how to widen my programming abilities. It would seem like most of the things learned would come necessity. what i mean by that is that I learn how to program code for a specific piece of gear because I need to for a job. But what are some thing I could do to basically prep myself for upcoming needs? Any input would be appreciated.
|
Thank you for all the help, the IR emitter had to be moved a couple of inches away from the eye
________________________________
From: Jeffrey <binkyangela@...>
To: Crestron@...
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 7:50 AM
Subject: [Crestron] DirecTV IR Control
?
Has anyone had trouble getting IR control to work with a DirecTV box.
I believe the model is H20. I have tried learning commands, using crestron module so far nothing. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
Jeff
|
Does anyone have an RS-232 or IP module to control this unit?
Thanks
Don
|
Re: Simple + Guru Question - Differences for IP modules between 2 and 3 series
Is the module completely Simpl+? Having not used a MC3 yet all I can tell you is that if you are using anything that uses ticks for timing it will cause timing issues. This is because a tick in the MC3 is much much shorter than in a 2 series. On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 10:29 AM, waltonad0283 <waltonad0283@...>wrote: **
Hi All,
I have a Simpl+ module that I wrote for an IP controlled device, it works
fine with my Cp2E processor in the office. - However - when It got sent out
to a client site that has an MC3 in it - it doesn't work.
I am trying to switch audio/video sources - on my Cp2E - everything
happens fine. On the MC3, toolbox shows making a successful socket
connection, but the switch never happens. Then the socket closes like it's
supposed to.. Has anyone else had this happen - on any IP module that
worked on a 2 series and not on a 3 series - and if so what was the
resolution?
Thanks
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
|
