Added a fake DriveTrainVariant and a constant to disable the DriveTrain. #6
Conversation
| driveTrainVariant = variant; | ||
| } | ||
| else{ | ||
| driveTrainVariant = new LazyDriveTrainVariant(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider pushing this up to the caller, which is this line in robotInit()
System.out.println("Hello me is robit!"); DriveTrain.setVariant(new FalconDriveTrainVariant()); scheduler = CommandScheduler.getInstance();
The problem that I see is that if we don't have the drivetrain hardware then I think the new FalconDriveTrainVariant() will trigger the FalconDriverTrainVariant constructor, which will try to connect to the non-existent motors and gear box solenoids. My guess is that it'll generate a bunch of CAN bus warnings on the console output and it'll work fine, but that's a guess.
Another thought is to just make the driveTrainVariant in the constructor for DriveTrain() and remove the setVariant method completely. driveTrainVariant becomes a non-static member of DriveTrain, but I think that's okay... The only way to create a DriveTrain appears to be DriveTrain's getInstance method; the DriveTrain constructor is private. DriveTrain is a classic singleton.
| } | ||
| else{ | ||
| driveTrainVariant = new LazyDriveTrainVariant(); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| private final LazySolenoid shifterSolenoid = |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The LazySolenoid here also needs a be tied into the kEnableDriveTrain
Also, are we missing something like a kEnableDriveTrainShifter constant? i.e., should this be
new LazySolenoid(kDriveShifterID, kEnableSolenoids && kEnableDriveTrain && kEnableDriveTrainShifter);
I would like a review on this pull request, if somebody is able to do so.
I will merge this in two days if nobody reviews it.