Add flag to enable tick of non-running BT + UC2 in tests #68
Conversation
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
Signed-off-by: Matteo Morelli <matteo.morelli@cea.fr>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
…tests Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
MarcoLm993
force-pushed
the
models/add-uc2-test-example
branch
from
2e0798a
to
7ed7e73
Compare
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
ct2034
requested changes
Nov 12, 2024
| @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ | |||
| # action pattern | |||
| # attributes of goal | |||
| int32 block_id | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All of
- InspectBlock.action
- InspectBlockImplem.action
- MoveBlock.action
- MoveBlockImplem.action
- RecoverBlock.action AND
- RecoverBlockImplem.action
are exactly the same. Why not use one definition for all?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a question for @m-morelli , but I would expect the original interfaces (with strings and so on) to have some differences...
src/as2fm/jani_generator/scxml_helpers/top_level_interpreter.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/as2fm/jani_generator/scxml_helpers/top_level_interpreter.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| skills: List[str] = field(default_factory=list) | ||
| # Similar to the skills, currently unused |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That is a good question... in my opinion we do not, but before getting rid of it we should talk to the AS2FM users from Genova ;)
| @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ | |||
| <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would suggest to call this skill:
- IsBlockDown or
- HasBlockFallen
or something else that makes sense grammatically ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is also something to ask @m-morelli
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Lampacrescia <marco.lampacrescia@de.bosch.com>
ct2034
approved these changes
Nov 14, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
With this PR, BT execution stops by default once the root node receives a status different from RUNNING.
Additionally, I added a flag called "bt_tick_if_not_running" that can be set to true to allow re-ticking a BT once it failed or it succeeded.
Finally, the example from UC2 has been added in the test folder and is treated as a unit test (the "fixed" one is still reaching only 98% success rate, some debugging is still required there, but the "bugged", non-reactive version is now consistently failing as expected!)