Document low-resource vision simulation with Photonvision

[Ruthie-FRC]

Description

What changed? Why? (the code + comments should speak for itself on the "how")

Added section on low-resource vision simulation with Photonvision, including configuration details and use cases for low-spec machines. Closes #2358

[Ruthie-FRC]

do I need to go and apply linting?

[samfreund]

do I need to go and apply linting?

https://github.com/PhotonVision/photonvision/actions/runs/21883416684/job/63172029981?pr=2359

[Ruthie-FRC]

do I need to go and apply linting?

https://github.com/PhotonVision/photonvision/actions/runs/21883416684/job/63172029981?pr=2359

I know I need to... give me one second (I have a personal grudge against linting)

[Ruthie-FRC]

ok I think I linted it propperly

[Ruthie-FRC]

@samfreund idk why the build host is failing on linux

[gerth2]

Hey Ruthie - I left a pile of comments. I wrote those comments as I would for any documentation writer, poking at some specific choices in wording and inconsistency with other parts of the documents. Much aligned with the classic memes, it's easier to dig into details on small PR's than big refactors :)

As I read the whole PR, I think there's at least a chance it was the output of an LLM, with limited input to the prompt. As a general rule, we've disallowed such content to be merged directly - not that individuals shouldn't be using such tools to aid development, but because the output still needs thorough review.

For example, this new doc section is the only mention of "chromebooks" throughout our documentation, which is highly surprising.

It's also possible you wrote this all yourself, but didn't have full context to the PhotonVision project.

Regardless of whether the content is LLM output or your own creative work, stuff like this will have to be fixed up.

Let us know how best to move forward. If you have interest to continue developing out this section, it might be worthwhile to talk about your end goals with adding this and interactively flesh out the path forward. Alternatively, if you want to directly address the comments and move forward as-is, that is a possibility.

[Ruthie-FRC]

Hey Ruthie - I left a pile of comments. I wrote those comments as I would for any documentation writer, poking at some specific choices in wording and inconsistency with other parts of the documents. Much aligned with the classic memes, it's easier to dig into details on small PR's than big refactors :)

As I read the whole PR, I think there's at least a chance it was the output of an LLM, with limited input to the prompt. As a general rule, we've disallowed such content to be merged directly - not that individuals shouldn't be using such tools to aid development, but because the output still needs thorough review.

For example, this new doc section is the only mention of "chromebooks" throughout our documentation, which is highly surprising.

It's also possible you wrote this all yourself, but didn't have full context to the PhotonVision project.

Regardless of whether the content is LLM output or your own creative work, stuff like this will have to be fixed up.

Let us know how best to move forward. If you have interest to continue developing out this section, it might be worthwhile to talk about your end goals with adding this and interactively flesh out the path forward. Alternatively, if you want to directly address the comments and move forward as-is, that is a possibility.

Hi! None of this actually was written by LLM. I struggle with wording of things sometimes though, so all errors are my own when it comes to documentation. however, I have tested this code on my own, and myself and my team have used it with success for the current REBUILT season. I wrote this because myself, and many others on my team, do not have easy or consistent access to computers other than Chromebooks, on which we run GitHub codespaces set up with wpilib vs code. There are a lot of problems we have run into during our several years of this setup, one of which is the fact that we tend to get a lot of loop overrun errors clogging up our logs when we run simulate robot code. seeing as this is a photonvision specific fix, and that there is no documentation for trying to run wpilib sim with photonvision on a Chromebook and how to remedy this issue, I figured it would be helpful to the many other students I know who both work on Chromebooks and run photon vision on their robots. Apologies for any confusion. I will work on fixing the things you brought up immediately.

[gerth2]

Ok. So some context to add as input:

GitHub codespaces set up with wpilib vs code

This is an uncommon setup. As far as sim performance goes, I believe the critical thing here is that you're using codespaces . The chromebook portion is irrelevant, it just happens to be the device used to access the codespace online (unless you're certain the browser is executing part of the simulation? I'd be surprised by that though).

Otherwise, looks like you're tackling the other comments.

Appreciate it, thank you so much for jumping in to contribute, and being extremely receptive of feedback! These cycles are very normal on large, jointly managed, long running codebases (read: any large company or research institution :) ). I'm thrilled you're here and making updates, and (hopefully) learning a tiny bit more about sw dev in the big wide world!

[Ruthie-FRC]

This is an uncommon setup. As far as sim performance goes, I believe the critical thing here is that you're using codespaces . The chromebook portion is irrelevant, it just happens to be the device used to access the codespace online (unless you're certain the browser is executing part of the simulation? I'd be surprised by that though).

Sorry for the late reply! Ive noticed that when i run a codespace on the only other computer i have access to, a latitude 5590, i do not have nearly as many loopoverrun errors, so i belive that it is partially the Chromebook partially the codespace usage.

[Ruthie-FRC]

@gerth2 is it ok now? sorry for the late follow up, the season got frantic

[gerth2]

Bah. @Ruthie-FRC many appologies. life got busy for me too. Tacking this one back on my review list. Quick look makes me think we're probably fine - if you think conversations are good to go, feel free to hit the "resolved" button. I'll review the net changes and try to answer any questions in the next few days

[gerth2]

Looks like CI might still be failing, see https://github.com/PhotonVision/photonvision/actions/runs/22652095116/job/65653545414?pr=2359#step:6:116 ?

[gerth2]

@Ruthie-FRC one proposed wording update - if you can get CI to pass, I think I'll call it good to go (I can add issues for some of the other things).

Thanks again!!!

[Ruthie-FRC]

ofc! thank you so much, I'll make those changes asap!

edit: I did, the CI might still fail, in which case i'll have to do a bit more digging into why. might be a few hours though.

lgtm