This PR modifies commands. Please open a corresponding PR in Python Commands and include a link to this PR.

/format

/format

/format

/format

How is this one looking?

/format

You have to do this as a seperate overload as the logic internally will be different

You have to do this as a seperate overload as the logic internally will be different

It's the internal logic that I'm struggling with. I've posted the initial setup, but I'm not sure how to join m_ptr to the vector argument.

/format

I feel like accepting additional commands here messes up the semantics a bit. fork feels like it should be a unary operator (akin to asProxy), not a binary one.

For the few cases that need a multi-command ScheduleCommand, a static factory (or even the constructor) should serve with more fitting semantics.

I feel like accepting additional commands here messes up the semantics a bit. fork feels like it should be a unary operator (akin to asProxy), not a binary one.

For the few cases that need a multi-command ScheduleCommand, a static factory (or even the constructor) should serve with more fitting semantics.

So more like Commands.fork() instead of command.fork() ?

I feel like accepting additional commands here messes up the semantics a bit. fork feels like it should be a unary operator (akin to asProxy), not a binary one.

For the few cases that need a multi-command ScheduleCommand, a static factory (or even the constructor) should serve with more fitting semantics.

So make it a static method not an instance method?

I feel like accepting additional commands here messes up the semantics a bit. fork feels like it should be a unary operator (akin to asProxy), not a binary one.

For the few cases that need a multi-command ScheduleCommand, a static factory (or even the constructor) should serve with more fitting semantics.

My interpretation of this is that there should be command.fork() (without any args) and Commands.fork(commands...), though I'd like to hear confirmation from @Starlight220.

My interpretation of this is that there should be command.fork() (without any args) and Commands.fork(commands...)

Yes, that's what I meant.

Okay

My interpretation of this is that there should be command.fork() (without any args) and Commands.fork(commands...)

Yes, that's what I meant.

I gotcha. I'll have to change the robotpy version too. Somehow it's already been merged

/format

/format

I'm not sure what the cpp error is