|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Ok I been trying to program easy C from lab view and I came with a conclusion. It would be good but its not worth the time to teach the other programmers since we took a programing course during the winter break
and are very use to programming the standard way(Mplab). So what do you guys feel about programming with lab view? Worth it or not? ![]() Last edited by Nine9cracker : 13-01-2006 at 20:26. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
If you already know the language, it's probably not worth it - getting used to a whole new interface is time consuming, and you're probably better off sticking with what you know/learned how to do. But, if you're all new to programming languages in general, I guess EasyC is the way to go.
|
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Quote:
![]() |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Quote:
Using it for really tough programming....if you're doing tough programming you shouldn't use it. You have a limited number of commands, and espesially given that most real world applications call for C, not EasyC, you might as well learn it sometime. |
|
#5
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
I played around with EasyC for a few hours yesterday and I really like it. While I like writing code myself(and I will this year), I'd rather play around with flowcharts to get the program done ASAP. It's the same job done in less time - and in most cases less effort. IMHO, you can do quite advanced coding with it too. You cannot make a whole lot of syntax errors either. This really is a gift for rookie programmers.
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Quote:
WPILib is great for prototyping code for the veteran programmer. All the fun of writing code, none of the hassles of IFI default. For example, I just wrote a absolute heading based drive system (robot always moves in the direction the jostick is pointing) in about 10 minutes with 7 lines of code... ![]() |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
I've been free-writing Java and C++ for four years now but this is my first year programming for a robot, and my first year on the team, so I think I'll be using easyC just for its capabilities with the sensors. That seems to be the consensus here anyway.
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Quote:
Currently the installable version is slightly messed up, but you can look at the document and the examples (they are essently the same as what you would write). I'll put up the real stuff Saturday with real downloadable example MPLab projects. Brad |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
I briefly looked at easyC, and it seems useful for teaching newer programmers, but it's hard to mix easyC code and code you wrote the regular way (copying and pasting is a great way to introduce bugs) because it completely changes the structure of the code. It also hides some useful features (like interupts, or being able to wait for less than one millisecond) while leaving in other things that would completely perplex newer programmers, for example the operator menu contains things like '^=' and '?:'. The big problem i have with it is you can't mix easyC and hand-written code because of the huge difference in structure.
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
EasyC hides all the background work to make it easy to control sensors that
would have been other wise difficult or time consuming for programmers to integrate. For instance you could have the camera and gyro working together to drive the robot in 15 or so blocks of code. I highly recommend everyone check out tutorial programs 6 & 7 they truly show the power of EasyC and WPIlib over writing everything by hand. While I can appreciate everyone who wants to code by hand, do all the sensor timings and make the code so clean you can save that extra byte of memory. There is a hard way and an easy way to accomplish the same goal. When you get a flat tire you can change a tire with an impact gun or a tire iron in the end you get the same result. Last edited by Kingofl337 : 13-01-2006 at 23:35. |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
programing in c is so easy i never programed before and i picked it up in while programing last year. our programers have already finshed
drive moters auton mode just under 5 days 1388 all the way |
|
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Quote:
With that being said. I would probably only use EasyC for the flowchart capabilities. But even that is over-kill, why not just use a flowcharting program? |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Mike, I don't think your response was in line with the Gracious Professionalism that FIRST was founded on. Especially seeing your not even talking about the right product. EasyC does not use flow charting, it based on drag and drop C which teaches programmers the syntax they need to learn to program freehand in C.
With the WPIlib for a back end, EasyC has all the sensors for this years competition and more. This includes the CMUCam, Gyro, Encoders, gear tooth sensors, and more. It is very possible for a team to have built and completed most of the programing without a finished robot because EasyC allows you to focus on the problem not the minor details of setting up all sensors. With just a few Victors on a piece of plywood and some motors you can see what is going on very quickly. Plus, on-line mode allows you to see what is going on real-time and you can use the data you collected to write your code. Good Luck 1388 Last edited by Kingofl337 : 14-01-2006 at 23:50. |
|
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
Quote:
If I understand EasyC, this "drag and drop C" is basically flowcharting that generates code. Also, if you read the post I quoted it said that he did not use EasyC. It may be perfectly possible to program a theoretical robot in 5 days using EasyC. I would not know, as I have not tried. The person I quoted, however, said that he programmed it purely in text-based C. That is what I was doubting. And yes, good luck 1388. Good luck to all teams. |
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Easy C programming , Worth teaching?
First point, telling somebody they aren't GP doesn't seem all that Gracious and Professional to me, that could have been handled privately, there was no reason to bring it out here.
Secondly, I agree with Mike, there's just no way you're done, not without a completed robot, you may have made a lot of progress but I'm willing to put up a sizable bet you're not done. You can't have finished programming something you haven't even built, or are you going to try and tell me you finished the robot too? Everyone needs to chill out here. As far as teaching EasyC I see it to be a good method, one of many though, to teach new programmers, other than that I don't personally have much use for it, but other teams might, so my suggestion is do what suits your needs. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Programming Vex w/ MPLab | dababyjebus | FIRST Tech Challenge | 27 | 25-04-2008 09:11 |
| Programming - Getting Started | Mark McLeod | Programming | 80 | 16-04-2008 23:37 |
| Organizing a programming team. | scitobor 617 | Programming | 7 | 28-01-2005 19:18 |
| What do you think about how easy theyre making programming? | Leav | Programming | 76 | 11-01-2005 12:07 |
| Robot Programming Education | phrontist | Programming | 11 | 03-05-2004 07:32 |