[Al3+]

Originally Posted by Tanner

I just wish I could find some way of blaming the mechanical team after the robot went backwards in autonomous at Peachtree...

Obviously the wheels were mounted in reverse.

Originally Posted by Bongle

The trick is for each sub-component of a team (programming, electrical, mechanical) to listen to the other people's proposals for what is wrong, and investigate it to the best of their abilities. If the programmers say that a limit switch might have a short while the hardware guys say that the program isn't checking the switch often enough, both teams should double-check both of their components as best they can.

Quite often the programmers can direct the hardware guys to a potential source of a short or disconnected wire, while the hardware guys can tell the programmers if they're operating some system outside of its design limits. If both sub-teams can work together rather than fighting over whose bug it is, then you should have a more successful robot.

My comment wasn't completely serious. I'm not in favor of automatically denying that a problem is a code error unless it's glaringly evident that it's not a code error. (For example, the signal light wasn't blinking correctly. Nothing in the code deals with the signal light at all.)

I'm just lightheartedly expressing how often it seems that programmers investigate an issue only to discover an underlying electrical problem.