Code Reuse - consider code as COTS parts?
 

There have been several threads which talk about reuse of code and why/if Kevin's code is strictly legal given the wording of R76. I would like to suggest that code (like Kevin's) should be considered a common off the shelf component. The cost accounting for it is $0 since it is available free of charge to all teams.

Re: Code Reuse - consider code as COTS parts?
 

I completely agree with your logic, however i would e-mail first and ask them if its legal.

Re: Code Reuse - consider code as COTS parts?
 

I think that using something like Kevin's camera code would be somewhat akin to using a bolt-on assembly. But on the flip side, FIRST encourages us to use Kevin's code (or a similar library).

The wording is weirder this year. I still say that it is unreasonable to expect us to change every line of code when you use a library.

If we have to modify any libraries we use, shouldn't we have to modify the IFI libraries? :D

Re: Code Reuse - consider code as COTS parts?
 

Where Would I get Kevin's Code?

Re: Code Reuse - consider code as COTS parts?
 

Re: Code Reuse - consider code as COTS parts?
 

which file is it though all of them or which 1 ?:confused:

Re: Code Reuse - consider code as COTS parts?
 

I would argue that the second paragraph in 8.3 ROBOT RULES clears this up.

When you apply that to R76, it seems like they just want us to have a working knowledge of what is going on in the code. Sure, make some changes, improve something here and there, adapt here and there. I think rewriting it to do the same thing would be officially more legal but totally against the logic that they're asking us to use in the quoted passage.