Higher and lower level components is confusing

[calebeby]

Hi @virtuald and @PeterJohnson,
I think it's confusing that there are higher and lower level components. I like the way that @frc1418 had components and automations. I think updating this in the docs would make it easier for beginners to understand the difference, and it would be good for them to live in separate folders.

[virtuald]

Is it the wording that's confusing or the concept?

[calebeby]

The wording

[virtuald]

Ok, that's fair then.

I'm not quite sure how I feel about using the word 'automations'. I chose 'components' and 'controllers' for my rewrite of 2423's code.

It's probably a good idea to add a note that it's useful to separate them into different folders. Though, worth noting that the magicbot sample only has a components directory -- does that mean we should add a more complex magicbot example?

I'm working on other things, but in the meantime feel free to edit it yourself and submit a PR to clarify it. :)

[calebeby]

Regarding the name, personally, I prefer automations, because you are connecting more than one component together.

Regarding examples, reading 1418's code has been more helpful for me than the samples because it has real parts, like intake, winch, and drive, instead of component1 and component2.
I definitely think it would be helpful to create a more realistic example that is simpler than 1418's code.

I am currently programming a robot for BunnyBots, and once that season is over (middle of December) I would be willing to add it as an example.

@ErikBoesen what do you think about the naming? Do you prefer automations, controllers, or something else?

[ErikBoesen]

I don't have a strong opinion on this, but if I had to choose I'd go with "automations," even though it's rather confusing when combined with autonomous.