Quote:
Originally Posted by Ether
OK thanks that's pretty clear. Is there any performance difference between the approach shown above and the code in post#15? Which approach do you prefer, and why (or does it depend on context)?
|
Performance-wise the latter would be better, since the post in number #15 has three elements in the list whereas the post that you quoted only as one element in the list. Every 20ms, every element in the list is enumerated upon and conditions for execution are checked. This performance boost is negligible unless command groups are in excess of hundreds of commands, which is extremely uncommon (the best I got was 75, though I re-made the entire command based framework from scratch so some of the commands were syntaxical (wait, if, else, etc.))
However, the former approach (#15) is the preferred option for modularity sake. Integrating the wait with both executions turn the command, not into a modular command, but rather a defined sequence. If the sequence is regular (e.g. load hopper, wait, shoot) than it would be preferential to use a CommandGroup, for readability sake. If the sequence is irregular (e.g. turn 15 degrees, wait, shoot at low velocity) than the command will only be used once and more commands of similar conditions (e.g. turn 30 degrees, wait, shoot at high velocity) would have to be developed. In this case, it would be easier to make a turn command, a wait command, and a shoot command and plug them in in a similar fashion to post #15.