cRIO v43 == fail

[rbmj]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

Once you recognize that the modules are not addressed by slot number in the 2012 image, it all makes a lot more sense. The first module of any type is number 1; the second one is number 2.

I missed that. So it's 1, 2 - not 0, 1? And these will corrospond to the first/second sidecars?

Thanks!

As a side note, I like it better when they're addressed by absolute slot number. Makes coordination between electrical and programming easier, and that way you can keep track of what's on what slot (it'll look like the analog and digitals are on the same slot now). But if that's how it's done now...

[codedr]

Yes, it's a step backwards.

I don't know what FIRST is thinking, but I suspect they are 'making it easier' when they are really making it harder.

I also suspect that FIRST wants to hardcode the slot locations so they don't have to probe the cRIO bus to find the analog and digital modules. The embedded FIRST code wants to address the analog module to get the battery voltage, and the digital module to flash the status indicator.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by codedr

I don't know what FIRST is thinking, but I suspect they are 'making it easier' when they are really making it harder.

It's a way to make team code consistent between the 8-slot and 4-slot cRIOs.