-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
Add ruff/ruff format to pre-commit & Add integration test #28
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
Conversation
07572d0 to
a6486ff
Compare
| current_joint_state = robot.get_current_joint_state() | ||
| urdf_initial_values = [0.2, 0.3, 0.1] | ||
| assert ( | ||
| current_joint_state == urdf_initial_values | ||
| ), f"{current_joint_state=} != {urdf_initial_values=}" |
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.
Test a bug, should be fixed with a6486ff
| throttle_duration_sec=2.0, | ||
| skip_first=True, | ||
| ) | ||
| rclpy.spin_once(self, timeout_sec=0.0) |
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.
With this approach is the node's spin coupled to the topics it's processing? Why are you setting the timeout to 0? Does that cause it to move on immediately and not block?
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.
Yes, this will process current callbacks and return without waiting, so if there are none it will just return
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.
What happens if there is no message and this returns. How would this get future callbacks if nothing is spinning?
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 only care about processing them when we call get_current_joint_command, that is why we only spin when we need the values from those callbacks
| msg = f"Joint name '{joint_name}' not in input keys {msg.name}" | ||
| raise ValueError(msg) from None |
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.
Should this be masking the function variable msg? I also don't see any try statements around the call to filter_joint_state_msg so what happens to a test when this is triggered?
| // Check the initial_value param is used | ||
| if (!interface.initial_value.empty()) | ||
| { | ||
| joint_states_[index][i] = std::stod(interface.initial_value); |
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.
By setting this can it cause the connected robot to jump to the initial position when started?
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.
I think this should fix the issue of the robot jumping to the initial position
MarqRazz
left a comment
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.
Thanks for adding new tests!
To make it easy to test #25 and #24