Quote:
|
by the compile/download cycle time
|
This is not related to CPU usage and was caused by bugs in the latest LabVIEW release related to the compiler cache. Please understand that I'm not claiming WPILib or LabVIEW are perfect. Internal to NI I called a special meeting with VPs and the President in order to highlight these bugs, the impact they had on teams/customers, and to motivate that they not only get fixed, but that testing is improved to keep them fixed. I continue to use FRC as motivation to push various internal teams to improve areas of the product, but this has nothing to do with cpu usage.
I have two years logs for 1718. Their typical usage for matches in 2013 St Louis was under 30%. At earlier 2013 competitions it is several points lower, and in 2012 at the end of the season it was 40%. I don't have logs for the other teams on my laptop.
CPU usage is an interesting challenge. One loop with more work to do than time to do it in -- and the result is that the CPU will be pegged. Finding that loop can be a challenge, but they seem to have accomplished it and hopefully learned because of it. There are numerous tools to help professionals and FRC teams alike in monitoring and controlling CPU usage, loop rates, etc. I am more than happy to help here or by other means, but to me a CPU usage challenge doesn't mean WPILib is broken. It means that FRC isn't easy.
Defaults:
The decision not to have default binary was made five years ago, and I've been approached only once since, by an alum, and we discussed the tradeoffs related to it. To a large degree, test mode was added as a result of that previous discussion. Features should be added because they will increase the success of students in FRC, and that needs to include a variety of opinions. This forum thread is not the right place to design this ... but perhaps another thread?
Quote:
|
In 2012, I was able to ...
|
And that was a nice accomplishment. If WPILib were perfect, would you have learned more, or less? While WPILib isn't intentionally trying to get in your way, I don't want it to hide real-world programming issues from you either. I'm pretty sure that the changes you made in 2012 were already incorporated in the 2013 code along with a number of other performance improvements -- not all WPILib changes add on top and make it heavier. Other changes in 2013 were test mode and an newer, leaner, interop version of Network Tables. These were intentionally added to aid newer teams.
If you have strong feelings about WPILib, and I know you do, please don't rant in various threads all over CD. Create a thread that is dedicated to it, and we can get into discussions about how much it should do for teams, what it should not do for teams, etc.
Greg McKaskle