fixed motorOff() in motor_funcs.cpp.

[cottjr]

Prior version turned off both motors even though only one was specified and intended by the 'motor' argument.

[paradug]

Carl, You are right, it looks like the original code stops both motors. Looking at the way it was coded, it looks like it was changed from one specified motor to effect both motors 0 and 1. I suspect that this was modified as some kind of test, because the function parameters and function code do not match. We should look at all the instances of motor_off() in the program and determine if the use was to turn off one or both motors. If the program has a lot of motor_off(0) followed by motor_off(1) statements, then I suspect that the intent was only to stop one motor. If the program only has a single motor_off() statement, but it is clear that we wanted to stop both motors, we will need to make further changes. Hope to see you tonight at RBNO. Regards, Doug P.

…

On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 9:20 PM cottjr ***@***.***> wrote: Prior version turned off both motors even though only one was specified and intended by the 'motor' argument. ------------------------------ You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: #2 Commit Summary - fixed motorOff() in motor_funcs.cpp. Prior version turned off both motors even though only one was specified and intended by the 'motor' argument. File Changes - *M* club_robot_nav1/motor_funcs.cpp <https://github.com/dprg/2016-Club-Robot-Code/pull/2/files#diff-0> (11) Patch Links: - https://github.com/dprg/2016-Club-Robot-Code/pull/2.patch - https://github.com/dprg/2016-Club-Robot-Code/pull/2.diff — You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAXBG2FIRIAKVTOJGXW4HB3P5K3NLA5CNFSM4H4XL6A2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4G4YUCFQ>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAXBG2DBC5LGSLM5C5SFWJLP5K3NLANCNFSM4H4XL6AQ> .

[cottjr]

Yup - makes sense... That was the last / glaring obstacle for me to close the velocity loops. It drove me crazy for a few hours that I could run a step response cycle and tune PID for the right motor. Or I could run a step response for both motors at the same time. But when I tried to do the left motor by itself - no workie. Finally traced it down to sending the motorGo() to left motor, then sending motorOff() to right motor. Yeah - I'm a little more bald now ;-) Anyhow I should be there to tonight. I have good progress to show... Carl

…

On Tue, Jul 2, 2019 at 9:22 AM paradug ***@***.***> wrote: Carl, You are right, it looks like the original code stops both motors. Looking at the way it was coded, it looks like it was changed from one specified motor to effect both motors 0 and 1. I suspect that this was modified as some kind of test, because the function parameters and function code do not match. We should look at all the instances of motor_off() in the program and determine if the use was to turn off one or both motors. If the program has a lot of motor_off(0) followed by motor_off(1) statements, then I suspect that the intent was only to stop one motor. If the program only has a single motor_off() statement, but it is clear that we wanted to stop both motors, we will need to make further changes. Hope to see you tonight at RBNO. Regards, Doug P. On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 9:20 PM cottjr ***@***.***> wrote: > Prior version turned off both motors even though only one was specified > and intended by the 'motor' argument. > ------------------------------ > You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: > > #2 > Commit Summary > > - fixed motorOff() in motor_funcs.cpp. Prior version turned off both > motors even though only one was specified and intended by the 'motor' > argument. > > File Changes > > - *M* club_robot_nav1/motor_funcs.cpp > <https://github.com/dprg/2016-Club-Robot-Code/pull/2/files#diff-0> > (11) > > Patch Links: > > - https://github.com/dprg/2016-Club-Robot-Code/pull/2.patch > - https://github.com/dprg/2016-Club-Robot-Code/pull/2.diff > > — > You are receiving this because your review was requested. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > < #2?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAXBG2FIRIAKVTOJGXW4HB3P5K3NLA5CNFSM4H4XL6A2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4G4YUCFQ >, > or mute the thread > < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAXBG2DBC5LGSLM5C5SFWJLP5K3NLANCNFSM4H4XL6AQ > > . > — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2?email_source=notifications&email_token=AA4FAKA6QSJVOSJWS6GNG7DP5NQBLA5CNFSM4H4XL6A2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGODZBODGQ#issuecomment-507699610>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA4FAKDBLKABZYEHLCIHYBDP5NQBLANCNFSM4H4XL6AQ> .