Implemented get_digital_new_release

[miles352]

Summary:

I added the function Controller::get_digital_new_release

Motivation:

I would like to be able to use this method in my pros project and I think it makes sense because there is already get_digital_new_press.

References (optional):

PR made for issue #725

[Rocky14683]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[Rocky14683]

download link

[AndrewLuGit]

@miles352 I see you mirrored the logic in get_digital_new_press. The issue with this is that you cannot use both get_digital_new_press and get_digital_new_release, because if one of them calls set_button_pressed, it'll mess up the other one's call to get_button_pressed.
Example:
You call get_digital_new_press, and get_digital_new_release afterwards. When the button goes from being pressed to not being pressed, then get_digital_new_press will call set_button_pressed(port, button_num, false). Then, in get_digital_new_release, get_button_pressed(port, button_num) will return false, and so get_digital_new_release will return false, even though the button was just released.
Since you were the one who created the issue, if this behavior is okay with you, I'll go ahead and approve the PR. Otherwise, we'll need to implement some more complicated logic.

[miles352]

@AndrewLuGit That's a good point, I didn't realize that before. I was going to use both in my project so that issue won't be okay. I don't fully understand how the internal button states are stored but it seems like it wouldn't make sense to create separate button press storages for the two functions, so I'm not sure the best way to do this.

[djava]

it wouldn't make sense to create separate button press storages for the two functions

why not?

[miles352]

why not?

How would that work? I guess you would modify the controller_data struct, do you think something like this would work?

typedef struct controller_data {
    bool button_pressed_for_pressed[NUM_BUTTONS];
    bool button_pressed_for_released[NUM_BUTTONS];
} controller_data_s_t;

[miles352]

I went ahead and did it that way, it's probably not the best solution but I think the controller_data struct is only used in those two functions so it's probably okay for now.

[djava]

I'm not inherently opposed to this, assuming it works? It's only like, 12 bytes of static memory used if thats what you're worried about. We could consider doing this as a bitfield to save memory I guess but whatever.

[Rocky14683]

/azp run

[azure-pipelines]

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s).

[Rocky14683]

download link