Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FlippingUtil does not account for field type #1080

Open
rjbell4 opened this issue Mar 8, 2025 · 1 comment
Open

FlippingUtil does not account for field type #1080

rjbell4 opened this issue Mar 8, 2025 · 1 comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@rjbell4
Copy link

rjbell4 commented Mar 8, 2025

Describe the bug
Flipping Poses (etc.) using FlippingUtil on AndyMark field will produce incorrect results

To Reproduce
The FlippingUtil class contains fields fieldSizeX and fieldSizeY. These values are crucial when flipping paths across the field.

However, we have two different fields in 2025 Reefscape. The current values appear to be based on the welded field. Team Update 12 states:

The CORAL STATION has a connection to the AndyMark field perimeter which results in a variance in the
overall field width

Note this this issue is not about the Coral Station location, which changes, but which the team may need to deal with. Instead, this issue is about the used of fieldSizeY in the calculations for flipping a position, and how a welded field width would result in different behavior than an AndyMark field width.

Expected behavior
I believe that Path Planner will need to account for the field type, and use a different value for fieldSizeY on an AndyMark field.

Unless we should be expecting to override the value of fieldSizeY on an AndyMark field?

@rjbell4 rjbell4 added the bug Something isn't working label Mar 8, 2025
@mjansen4857
Copy link
Owner

Overriding the value of fieldSizeY is probably the best option. It's unfortunate that everyone running on the andymark field will need to change something for flipping to work properly, but its either override the Y size or call something else that would just do the same thing, but in a way that would need to be changed/removed in the future depending on if different field layouts continue to be an issue in the future.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants