Maybe you have forgotten the P of PID.Sam Groves said:If we use a DI controller the error doesnt get better.
What do you mean?BvU said:Hi,
Can you please read your post and agree that telepathy is required to make sense of it ?
Do present us with a complete case instead of leaving us guessing ...
Thanks !
##\ ##
What are you trying to control ?Sam Groves said:What do you mean?
What do you meanBvU said:Hi,
Can you please read your post and agree that telepathy is required to make sense of it ?
Do present us with a complete case instead of leaving us guessing ...
Thanks !
##\ ##
A 1st order ot a 2nd order system.Baluncore said:What are you trying to control ?
This is like extracting teeth.Sam Groves said:A 1st order ot a 2nd order system.
Please provide more information. Currently no one has any idea what you're asking. Imagine we don't know what a DI controller is or what you're doing with it.Sam Groves said:If we use a DI controller the error doesnt get better.Regarding the error it is the same as we didnt have any controller at all.But does the DI controller improve the recovery time or not to not having any controller at all?
Yeah I agree I think PI controllers are the best.DaveE said:This is the sort of subject where if you can't ask a question that experts can understand, you won't understand the answer.
Having said that, my general advice is to ditch the "D" part ASAP. It will just confuse you, and it's likely you don't need it anyway.
A DI (Dependency Injection) Controller is a component in software development that manages the dependencies between objects. It acts as a central point where objects can be configured and dependencies can be injected at runtime, thus promoting loose coupling and more manageable code.
The primary advantages of using a DI Controller include improved code maintainability, easier testing, and greater flexibility in changing dependencies without modifying the dependent classes. It also facilitates better management of lifecycle and scope of various components within an application.
Using a DI Controller can introduce complexity in the configuration and can potentially lead to issues if not properly managed. It might also increase the learning curve for new developers. Additionally, over-reliance on DI frameworks can lead to less transparent code, making it harder to trace and debug.
Without a DI Controller, dependencies between classes are typically managed manually or through more traditional means such as factory patterns or service locators. This can lead to tighter coupling between components and can make the code harder to test and maintain. However, it might simplify development for smaller projects or projects where dependency injection provides little benefit.
No, a DI Controller is not suitable for all types of projects. While it offers significant benefits for large and complex applications with many dependencies, it might be an overkill for small or simple projects where the overhead does not justify the benefits. The decision to use a DI Controller should be based on the specific needs and complexity of the project.