[sircedric4]

Thanks everyone for their help. I appreciate that the dashboard was made to be customized, but I think that there's a fundamental assumption in the way examples have been approached for the new control system.

Quite frankly, in our team I do not have any students that are really interested in programming. The teams I have been on have been small, and in our area most of the kids are much more interested in the actual hands on and mechanism stuff of robot building. I am able to convince one or two a year to help me "kluge" together enough code to get the robot to do the basics of what we want. The interest just isn't there on this aspect.

In the previous years on the previous control system, there was a simple example of how to handle every input, digital and analog, and if you didn't want to code you could assume some basic functionality out of the default code and you could wire your robot accordingly and it would work. I had assumed that the same functionality would be in the examples provided for the new control system. That was one reason I was getting snippy about having to go into the other *.cpp files and fix them. I had assumed they had been tested with the default system and everything would function.

For those teams with awesome programmers, the default code doesn't last an evening before they customize it and do really cool stuff with it. But for those of us without the experience and more importantly the student interest on this one facet, the fact is having a sample to start from that functions right away is of immeasurable value. We're doing as I tell the students, "the monkey see, monkey do" method of programming which doesn't work unless we have good examples.

I apologize for the high expectations, I'm just showing a different viewpoint from a younger team. Your help has been awesome and very gracious. Thanks again. I imagine you'll see me some more as we try to fight our way through encoders a little later.