-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 110
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
RSDK-8542 expose plans generated from builtin motion service without executing them #4287
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
18 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
8bc82de
tentative direction for PR
raybjork cfb2dee
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:viamrobotics/rdk into rsdk-8542
raybjork 12668f8
get the feature out for testing, not ready for merging
raybjork 6473153
unmarshal argument
raybjork 6287b7e
wip
raybjork 77571f8
wip
raybjork 5ecdfbb
de/serializing requests properly
raybjork 562f4ed
have both functions working
raybjork 886f856
wip
raybjork d88c458
Merge branch 'main' of github.com:viamrobotics/rdk into rsdk-8542
raybjork 34a274b
add explore back in
raybjork b88440a
add back explore
raybjork a6890e8
make explore tests work
raybjork 8667ccb
add case for nil destination
raybjork 4358fea
a little lint
raybjork 88158e2
comments
raybjork 8bb2243
return early
raybjork 71c912a
move inputEnabled to framesystem
raybjork File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Previously we were accepting pointers for all of the above, but this gets a little weird when you put it into a struct since the default if unset becomes a nil. Technically keeping them as pointers wouldnt be a regression because it was always possible to pass nils into the function, so I could see the argument for minimizing change by going back to making them pointers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO pointers are better.
Imagine the case where a Destination is not provided. If this is a pointer, then as you say, it is nil; easy to check. If it is a PoseInFrame, then an uninitialized Destination is a real PoseInFrame with a nil underlying Pose, and an empty string for parent frame. This is much more difficult to check for, and for some structs may have overlap with actual valid, meaningful inputs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Cool I'll revert back to this then. I think it will make the code easier to read too. I take it based on your lack of other comments that you're cool with the structifying and the general direction of the PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As far as it pertains to
Move
yes.I think we'll want the DoCommand API to be much more fully featured than what you have wireframed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah I agree. Do you have ideas of what you want to see in it now? I will do my best to include
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We will need things like being able to request motion from
motionplan
whose goal is a joint configuration, rather than a pose.We will need to be able to request a motion that starts from an arbitrary set of joint positions, rather than the current ones.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh right thats a good callout thanks