Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
Without the hardware, the code is useless. Tell me, programmers, could you do as well if you didn't have the pots, input devices, encoders, ultrasonics, HUDs, and other cool gadgets and only had timers? I doubt it! How many teams have had a seeming code failure, only to discover a bad [insert sensor here]?
And the hardware needs code to work right. Sure, it's good for producing smoke, or baffling the freshmen, or giving practice in some electronics stuff, without it, but I'm sure that that isn't what teams want.
So the hardware is integral to the software's success. Innovation in Control is therefore rewarding both parts; the hardware that allows the code to work right and the software (code) that makes sure the hardware does what it is supposed to. As such, it is not pure programming; nor is it pure hardware. It celebrates the mixture of the two.
|
I cant tell you how many times me and my students have been rushed on a code, every year our main teacher would complain that the autonomous code wasn't done and every single time we would say do you have a rolling chassis and manipulator done yet? Now we weren't just a software group we also did the electronics/pneumatics/web design/media and were key in the robot design, so anything we did [excluding web design and media] we had to wait for the main hardware to get finished or at least to a point where the chassis/drive train group said that we could start doing our job. Building a robot and making it work is about the unity of hardware and software not just about the individual side therefore there should not be a programming award unless your willing to make a hardware award.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Anderson
(But I wouldn't be surprised to find the same teams winning it year after year due to a combination of professional programming mentors and long-established team software infrastructure.)
|
i think this is exactly the problem, a lot of teams who don't have professional programming mentors would basically be out of luck, it would be like a team who does nothing in the community due to either lack of help or lack of interest trying to win chairmans. Back when i was a student on my team [wow 4 years ago] it was the teams rookie year, i was the head programmer [i was the only programmer] i had to learn it all my self with no help what so ever. there are teams [including some rookie teams] who have professionals who teach their students and honestly i don't think professional coding should be awarded. If it was then i want professional pneumatics, electronics, and machining awards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molten
But that is why those that put up with it should have an award.
|
really to me [being a programmer] i wouldn't want an award on my programming as its not just my programming that makes the robot work
wow that got long fast....