disabledInit()

[Merfoo]

After the autonomous period ends does the robot immediately switch over to teleop or does the robot get disabled then goes to teleop?

[gluxon]

It should go from autonomous to teleoperated without disabling, but you could always check with the practice mode of the driver station.

In other words, have a println in disabledInit() and run practice mode to check if the line is printed.

[Cecil]

The robot will be disabled during the transition from auto to teleop. The sequence will go like this:

Auto Disabled > Auto Enabled > Auto Disabled > Teleop Disabled > Teleop Enabled > Teleop Disabled

[Joe Ross]

It always goes disabled between Autonomous and Teleop. The amount of time that it is in disabled varies year to year.

[NotInControl]

Originally Posted by Cecil

The robot will be disabled during the transition from auto to teleop. The sequence will go like this:

Auto Disabled > Auto Enabled > Auto Disabled > Teleop Disabled > Teleop Enabled > Teleop Disabled

Just a clarification.

There is no difference between AutoDisabled and TeleopDisabled from the programming perspective. There are the same state.

While that is the text that is displayed in the driversation, in the codebase they are represented by the same two functions. DisabledInit() and DisabledPeriodic().

The Robot will go into disable mode when going from autonomous to teleop or anytime the robot is disabled.

Each time this happens, disabledInit() will run once, and then DisabledPeriodic() will run 50 times a second.

For further information. When the robot is first turned on it will first run RobotInit(), then DisabledInit(), then disabledPerioid().

Each time auto or teleop mode is entered, their corresponding init and periodic functions are called in the same manner as the disabled ones.

Hope this helps,
Kevin

[rrossbach]

Originally Posted by NotInControl

There is no difference between AutoDisabled and TeleopDisabled from the programming perspective. There are the same state.

While that is the text that is displayed in the driversation, in the codebase they are represented by the same two functions.

Just to be really clear , from a programming perspective they are two different states.

Even though the WPI framework calls the same disabledInit() and disabledPeriodic() functions irrespective of whether you're in Auto/Teleop/Test, in your code you can use the isAutonomous(), isOperatorControl(), and isTest() functions to distinguish what state you're in if you really need to.

[NotInControl]

Originally Posted by rrossbach

Just to be really clear , from a programming perspective they are two different states.

This is incorrect. There is only one disabled state for the robot, and there is only one interface to that state from the programming perspective.

Originally Posted by rrossbach

Even though the WPI framework calls the same disabledInit() and disabledPeriodic() functions irrespective of whether you're in Auto/Teleop/Test, in your code you can use the isAutonomous(), isOperatorControl(), and isTest() functions to distinguish what state you're in if you really need to.

While this is true in proving that the robot has 4 states (disabled, autonomous, teleop, and test, this statement does not provide evidence that Autonomous Disabled and Teleop Disabled are two difference states as your original post implied, and the first sentence of your last post tries to back up.

Your original post mentioned Autonomous Disabled, and Teleop Disables which could be interpreted that they are two different functions on the programatic side. However they are not.

I will not argue semantics, if you feel to call them two separate states by all means go ahead, but passing that information on to others is completely incorrect.

Regards,
Kevin

[rrossbach]

Kevin -
It's important to be clear and precise so that incorrect information isn't propagated.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but your posts seem to be teaching others that it is impossible in our robot code to distinguish between AutoDisabled and TeleopDisabled.

If that's what you're trying to convey, it is incorrect.

The WPI framework (at least in C/C++ and Java) provides the ability to distinguish between those "states". The following Java snippet will display different messages to the console depending on whether you're in AutoDisabled, TeleopDisabled, or TestDisabled. C/C++ is similar, just with slightly different syntax.

public void disabledPeriodic() {
if (isAutonomous()) System.out.println("AutoDisabled");
if (isOperatorControl()) System.out.println("TeleopDisabled");
if (isTest()) System.out.println("TestDisabled"); 
}

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by rrossbach

Kevin -
It's important to be clear and precise so that incorrect information isn't propagated.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but your posts seem to be teaching others that it is impossible in our robot code to distinguish between AutoDisabled and TeleopDisabled.

If that's what you're trying to convey, it is incorrect.

The WPI framework (at least in C/C++ and Java) provides the ability to distinguish between those "states". The following Java snippet will display different messages to the console depending on whether you're in AutoDisabled, TeleopDisabled, or TestDisabled. C/C++ is similar, just with slightly different syntax.

public void disabledPeriodic() {
if (isAutonomous()) System.out.println("AutoDisabled");
if (isOperatorControl()) System.out.println("TeleopDisabled");
if (isTest()) System.out.println("TestDisabled"); 
}

I believe what NotInControl is trying to say (correct me if I'm wrong) is that there are 2 SETS of states for the robot.

The first being: Autonomous/OperatorControl/Test
and the second being: Disabled/Enabled

So if the robot is Disabled it will run disabledInit() and disabledPeriodic() regardless of the state of Autonomous/OperatorControl/Test.

TBH, I think you all are arguing semantics. But that is just mu opinion.

[NotInControl]

Originally Posted by rrossbach

Kevin -
It's important to be clear and precise so that incorrect information isn't propagated.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by rrossbach

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but your posts seem to be teaching others that it is impossible in our robot code to distinguish between AutoDisabled and TeleopDisabled.

If that's what you're trying to convey, it is incorrect.

That is exactly what I am trying to convey and it is not incorrect.There is no such thing as AutoDisable and TeleopDisable. The robot only has disabled and enabled. This is further proven by your code example. You placed all of your boolean checks in one function... disabledPeriodic(), this shows that there is only one programmatic interface to the disabled state of the robot as I mentioned previously. You are creating artifical states with conditional statements and claiming they are different states on the robot. THAT IS INCORRECT. There is only one disabled mode for the robot, the same mode is reached irregardless of if you are in Auto, Teleop, or Test.

Originally Posted by rrossbach

public void disabledPeriodic() {
if (isAutonomous()) System.out.println("AutoDisabled");
if (isOperatorControl()) System.out.println("TeleopDisabled");
if (isTest()) System.out.println("TestDisabled"); 
}

In order to understand why this code "works", you need to understand what isAutonomous, isOperatorControl return, in simplistic terms they return the state of the selection from the driverstation. This is not indicitive that the robot has multiple disable modes.

The crux is, the disabled mode exisits even without a driverstation as it should. If you turn the robot on and have no driverstation connected to it, it will still be in disabled mode, and run disabled periodic (the one and only disabled mode). I challenge you to see what your output is then without a driverstation. It will be nothing. Those functions you use only exist and return true if a driver station is present and reading what state the driverstation wants the robot to be in next, not that the robot changed a state.

All your code does is show that you can read from a selector on the driverstation( or FMS if that was connected) which is what all those isAuto/isOperatorControl/isTest() methods return and print out a message which says auto disabled, or teleop disabled. The mere fact that you are doing that from one function (disabledPeriodic) on the robot shows you always remained in one state of the robot state machine (disabled) while you toggle the buttons on the driverstation, not that multiple disabled states exist, or that you magically switched from an Auto Disabled state to a Teleop Disabled State or to a Test Disable state.

At the end of the day, as I said before, I will not argue semantics of what a state is or what a programmatic interface is. Please call it what you will, add as many states to the robot as desired, but if you state to others the robot state machine has any other obtainable states then these: disabled, autonomous, teleop, or test (where auto, teleop, and test each enable the robot), you would be incorrect.

I believe the original poster received their answer, and see no other reason to continue this thread.

I apologize if you felt I hijacked your statement, the information provided was unclear and felt it needed clarification, nothing beyond that.

Have a great day, Regards,
Kevin