C++ Command Based Robot Template

Has anyone else noticed that the included template does not work correctly? After opening up the examples (GearBot, PacGoat) I noticed that they were different from the template!
Here are some of the discrepancies I noticed:

  • There is no CommandBase.cpp/.h in the examples
  • The headers in the template are different from examples
  • Examples work, template doesn’t
  • No Robot.h in template
    Realizing this made me rather mad. I had to write out some of the files by hand to make sure they worked, and by doing so our robot finally started up, drove, etc. But there was still one problem… My under-programmers are not very experienced with classes and complicated programs like this, so they had no clue how to get it to work. So I have created a blank robot with example command, subsystem, and all the small things needed (declaring motors, joysticks, methods, etc.) and for the sake of frankly being bored I would like to share the blank robot with you, especially if teams are having trouble trying to figure out why their robot won’t work. Please feel free to point out any errors, update with better examples, or tell me just how wrong it is, so message me or reply with any of those things.
    -Lord Supreme Programmer for Team 1410 Isaac

P.S. It works, I swear.

CodeTemplate.zip (2.03 MB)

CodeTemplate.zip (2.03 MB)

Never bothered with the command bassed template, that’s what RobotBuilder is for. Have you ever tried using it? It’s pretty great, you can get the annoying stuff done quickly so you have more time to work on perfecting commands or w/e :slight_smile: Sorry for not really answering question

I thought that was exactly what the RobotBuilder is supposed to create for you. Are you trying to write an entire Command Based Robot from scratch?

Is there a problem with writing it myself, instead of using a boring tool? Have you even looked at the template? It’s not that much. I only write out objects, methods, and what those will do. It’s relatively easy, and I don’t see the point of using RobotBuilder if this is more fun, I get more experience, and frankly I enjoy this way more.

Based on the kinds of questions and complaints you’ve been posting recently, I think the answer is “Yes, there is a problem.” If you want useful help, you need to use the tools as they are designed to be used.

If you want to go it alone, fine. But consider the effect on the rest of your team if you blaze your own path and can’t get help when you need it.

The problem with RobotBuilder is that no other team we know uses it. My team has never used it, and we never will. What experience do you gain by having your code generated for you? None. My team will stick with writing the code ourselves, thank you very much. RobotBuilder just looks like Labview on steroids, and will give me no experience to apply to writing code for a robot later in life.
And if you’re going to say that by not using RobotBuilder I am throwing my team under a bus and making it impossible for me to get help, how come every question I have asked has been answered? And how, if not using RobotBuilder will mean our code won’t work, is our robot currently error free and running smoothly?

You should not be flippantly giving Alan a hard time. Alan is trying to help you. And though your code is now “error free and running smoothly” the OP sounds desperate (and kinda silly).

The original post wasn’t a question, it was more stating that I have found the template to be wrong and thus have created a template that works. I don’t see how that could really be considered desperate. If there are other teams out there that would like to use the template and it helps, then great, I helped someone. What I am not okay with is people saying that by not using RobotBuilder, which doesn’t support Talon SRXs fully by the way so not usable for us, I am throwing my team under the bus.

I believe you may be using an old template and that’s what the problem is. Like you said the examples don’t have CommandBase and thats because it was removed this year. And the Robot.h I believe was called RobotTemplate last year. If you are using Eclipse with this years plugins I don’t know how you would be having these problems but that seems like what it is.

That’s what I thought, maybe I somehow had the old template, but it’s every installation we have! Is the template you have up to date?

Yes, but I am not programming in C++.

I mean, we use robot builder and I don’t see anything wrong with it, it generates all the tedious stuff which would be hard to keep track of by hand. The wiring table is indispensible and how easy it is to use means that it allows you more time to make the code more complex. Teaching freshmen with it is insanely easy(especially when you have the pretty pictures enabled) because it allows them to visualize what’s going on more easily, which IMHO is the most important part of FRC programming, or programming in general for that matter.

FWIW, for a test I ran earlier this week, I created a new command based C++ project from the template and didn’t run into any of the issues you describe.

Does the template have CommandBase.ccpp/.h? That’s what throws off the whole robot. You can still get it to work, just takes a lot of editing.

The main problem with RobotBuilder so far for us is the lack of CANTalon support. Also, we have ~7 Windows computers and 1 Mac, and currently RobotBuilder only opens on the Mac, except for the fact that it does not export.

Yes, the new project I created has CommandBase.cpp and CommandBase.h.

It’s hard for me at this point to know what exactly your question is.

There is no question. Look at the original post and you’ll see I did not ask for help with anything. I was simply stating a problem I ran into and then saying how I fixed it.

This looked a lot like a question:

You might find the discussion in http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1437494 helpful.

Also, we have ~7 Windows computers and 1 Mac, and currently RobotBuilder only opens on the Mac, except for the fact that it does not export.

RobotBuilder is a Java app and runs for others using Windows just fine. You seem to be having a lot of unique problems. I don’t know why that is, but I suspect a systemic failure in translating from the ScreenSteps instructions to your system.

Sorry to revive this thread, but is it just me, or is the CANTalon not LiveWindow Sendable? If so, what do you guys do for test mode? Because the livewindow is awesome for testing stuff but it would totally suck if it doesn’t support CANTalons :confused: