Skip to content

Conversation

bmagyar
Copy link
Member

@bmagyar bmagyar commented Dec 13, 2020

On top of #124, diffed against master. This PR can contain all additional checks we add on lifecycle states or whether we should have them at all.
The only real diff ATM is reverting the removal of checks

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #127 (15198ab) into master (38f793d) will decrease coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #127      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   37.63%   37.56%   -0.08%     
==========================================
  Files          30       15      -15     
  Lines        3762     1874    -1888     
  Branches     2354     1176    -1178     
==========================================
- Hits         1416      704     -712     
+ Misses        246      121     -125     
+ Partials     2100     1049    -1051     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 37.56% <ø> (-0.08%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...ller/test/test_load_forward_command_controller.cpp
...nt_state_controller/src/joint_state_controller.cpp
...ontroller/test/test_forward_command_controller.cpp
...int_trajectory_controller/test/test_trajectory.cpp
...ory_controller/src/joint_trajectory_controller.cpp
...ntroller/test/test_load_joint_state_controller.cpp
...ory_controller/src/joint_trajectory_controller.cpp
...ory_controller/test/test_trajectory_controller.cpp
...mand_controller/src/forward_command_controller.cpp
...ectory_controller/test/test_trajectory_actions.cpp
... and 35 more

@v-lopez
Copy link
Contributor

v-lopez commented Dec 13, 2020

Since the lifecycle changes are enforced by the controller manager, I don't think we need to check whether we're being used properly.
If we do need, we need to add on all controllers, and therefore will be copied by all future controller developers.

@bmagyar
Copy link
Member Author

bmagyar commented Dec 14, 2020

I wouldn't want to spend time on this given the understanding that we want to go back to lifecycle nodes at some point.

@bmagyar
Copy link
Member Author

bmagyar commented Dec 14, 2020

I've adjusted tests in #124 to make it pass without this

@bmagyar bmagyar closed this Dec 14, 2020
gwalck pushed a commit to b-robotized-forks/ros2_controllers that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2023
* Added new version of parser. Files checkout from ros-controls#122
* SensorHardware can handle multiple sensor types
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants