No warnings for missing CAN Talons

In years past, if one instantied an object that was connected via the CAN bus (like a Talon SRX), and that device was not present on the bus, the console was spammed with a pile of CAN timeout messages.

That seems to happen with a PCM, but I have instantiated a TalonFX object with no TalonFX within 30 years, and the console is quiet as can be.

Did something change around the timeout handling? Knowing that one’s CAN bus is not all there is kind of important…

ok. a little more information.

TalonFX objects will do reasonable error messages if they are missing and you try to set them. Attmepting to read them does not seem to make any noise.

Creating a Compressor object (explicetly or because implicitly via creation of a Solenoid()) will cause spam.

PowerDistributionPanel does not spam unless a Compressor object is also instantiated?

Looks like some things have indeed changed.

You will likely see an error on Talon FX construction if it’s missing from the bus (though this isn’t guaranteed).

As you noted, trying to set output on a Talon FX if it’s missing will cause reasonable error messages.

If you’re attempting to read data from a Talon FX that’s missing, you should be seeing “CAN Frame Not Received/Too-Stale” errors.

This is all the same behavior as in previous seasons.

I double checked.

  • constructor works fine with TalonFX not on the bus
  • trying to talk to the missing TalonFX gets some reasonable rate of error messages
  • reading from a missing TalonFX does not produce “CAN Frame Not Received/Too-Stale”

Not an issue, just an observation. The last 2 seemed different than prior years, but it really doesn’t matter…

This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.