Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

Yes we have, we even tried a simple hello world. The compiler can not find cstdio.h and the only one we could find is under a jre directory. Where are your system .h files?
Thanks in advance for answering.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

cstdio.h? Which example are you compiling... have you tried the FRC examples (the other ones won't work, AFAIK).

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I'll give it a try. Can you do a search on your machine for iostream.h and tell me where the file is located? That would be a really tell me alot.
Thanks

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

There is no iostream.h , thats the old style header and should not be used. iostream is what you're looking for.

There are 6 include directories on the project.

• C:\WindRiver\vxworks-6.3\target\h
• C:\WindRiver\vxworks-6.3\target\h\WPILib
• C:\WindRiver\vxworks-6.3\target\h\coreip
• C:\WindRiver\gnu\3.4.4-vxworks-6.3\x86-win32\lib\gcc\powerpc-wrs-vxworks\3.4.4\include
• C:\WindRiver\gnu\3.4.4-vxworks-6.3\x86-win32\include\c++\3.4.4
• C:\WindRiver\gnu\3.4.4-vxworks-6.3\x86-win32\include\c++\3.4.4\powerpc-wrs-vxworks

If you're just starting out with a new project (especially without any prior C/C++ experience) -- if you need to include anything other than WPILib.h you're probably doing something wrong.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I'm one of the mentors. It looks like the group did not install the WindRiver product correctly. The WPILib.h file includes IOStream, IO, and many others. We get compilation errors when trying to build the samples but, given the information you just gave us, the issues we are having are obvious. I'll have them reinstall so we can get off LabView.
Thanks for all your help.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

Thus why one only needs to include WPILib.h ;)

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I guess we choose WRWB since we have a few UNIX developers on the team. :/ Some help that was, running on windoze.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I don't really like Wind River or LV. I rather just stick to C/C++ progamming. Also, does anyone know if we're switching just to LabView next year?:confused:

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I don't know, I hope not.
But don't be surprised if Wind River pulls the plug on FIRST next year.

That said, I do find it curious that you don't like Wind River yet say you'd prefer to stick to C/C++ programming.
What is it about Wind River tools that makes you think it's something other?

Basically, you have (for free) world class cross compilers, Eclipse IDE with powerful debugging and analysis (static and runtime) tools, and the most robust realtime operating system in the world.
What's not to like?

And I don't want to knock NI, but the reality is that there's very limited job market potential for Labview programmers -- and that's not going to change.
I wanted my daughter involved in FIRST so she could learn software engineering in a hands-on way.
I do not want her to be a Labview programmer.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I'm curious to know where you find this to be a "reality". In my experience, LabVIEW programming is very widespread, both in education and in industry.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

Go to monster.com:
search for -- "software engineer" labview. (26 over the last 60 days)
search for -- "software engineer" c++. (1010 over the last 60 days)

I really have no axe to grind here.
I once did an automated circuit board test system for a client --using LabWindows CVI (I think that's what it was called).
It was great for quickly putting together a UI with knobs, sliders, dials, and meters.
You use the right tool for the job at hand.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I couldn't disagree more. If you take a really really narrow view, "programmers" don't use LabVIEW. However, engineers do. About half of the electrical, mechanical and controls engineers I work with know and use LabVIEW to various degrees.

"I do not want her to be a LabVIEW programmer." directly implies a very narrow job focus. I use 4 different languages for my day job, and I couldn't do my job well if you took away any single one of them.

C is better than LabVIEW in the same way that a hammer is better than a screwdriver.

I took a course in college in which I learned a new programming language every 2 to 4 weeks. It really opened a lot of doors for me.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

That just shows that people think it takes a "software engineer" to program in C++. LabVIEW is done by people other than software engineers.

While LabVIEW is certainly "great for quickly putting together a UI", once you get the hang of using a dataflow language, it's just as great for general-purpose embedded computing tasks. Exactly the sort of thing that C++ is good for.

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

NI's expectation is to supply both C/C++ and LV for a number of years to come. I don't see any indications of anyone pulling out, and I only expect the documentation and FRC specific elements to get better and easier.

As for the inevitable tool comparison, in my opinion WR and LV are both tools useful for engineering focused problem solving. There are many other tools in use too -- from CAD to mathematical techniques to precisely communicating technical information. I think experience practicing with these tools in an immersive environment like FRC offers a huge advantage towards deciding what sort of path to take after high school. As good as that experience is, it is just a taste, and I still think that the best benefit will be in learning, practicing, and appreciating the many roles -- the teamwork needed to build the robot. Experience in any particular tool tends to have a pretty short shelf life.

From Bureau of Labor Statistics --
From that it might follow that math isn't important because there isn't a good job market for mathematicians. This is of course a bad conclusion to draw.

My point is that the typical LV user wouldn't list their title as a LV programmer. They are a technician, engineer, scientist, or researcher doing some task, and the computer and LV are a tool they use to get their job done. Some jobs naturally call for specialization, others become common tasks such that the original job all but disappears as everyone learns the skill. Computers have evolved so that they are no longer back room devices with specialists keeping them humming. If computer languages evolve the right way, programming will follow a similar path. NI's goal is to provide tools to the engineering masses rather than the specialist?

Greg McKaskle

Re: Teams happy with Wind River Workbench?
 

I'm not sure how this applies to my assertion that Labview programmers are not in great demand. Whether or not Labview is a useful tool -- in certain situations, for use by non-software engineers -- is not under debate.

My point was, if involvement in FIRST is only going to expose my daughter to Labview over the next 3+ years, I'm having second thoughts.
By the time she goes to college, I want my daughter to be capable of developing robot control software that would be able to sense an object hurtling toward it and decide whether to take evasive action or catch the object -- oh, and to actually do one or the other before the object smashes into it or flies by.