-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 895
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
Refactoring: Splitting periodicUpdate method into smaller methods #761
base: humble-devel
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Refactoring: Splitting periodicUpdate method into smaller methods #761
Conversation
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.
Generally looks good, thanks. Just some smaller requests.
@@ -199,14 +199,14 @@ class RosFilter : public rclcpp::Node | |||
//! @param[out] message - The standard ROS odometry message to be filled | |||
//! @return true if the filter is initialized, false otherwise | |||
//! | |||
bool getFilteredOdometryMessage(nav_msgs::msg::Odometry * message); | |||
bool getFilteredOdometryMessage(nav_msgs::msg::Odometry & message); |
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 am struggling to find it, but at some point, there was definitely a document that suggested that in ROS 2, passing parameters as pointers was preferred. Was there a reason for this change? I'm not against it - I prefer reference parameters - but I am trying to determine if this was required for some reason, or you were just looking to be consistent.
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.
Raw pointers are more dangerous than references - pointer could be a NULL or contains wrong address, so it requires more guards in the method (e.g. https://pvs-studio.com/en/docs/warnings/v595/). So only reason is reference is safer because a compiler guards the argument.
I am struggling to find it, but at some point, there was definitely a document that suggested that in ROS
Unfortunately I didn't find that - but I found:
- https://design.ros2.org/articles/intraprocess_communications.html#number-of-message-copies - based on what message should be used in intraprocess communication, subscriber with shared pointer generates less copies of message instead of subscriber with unique pointer.
- https://github.com/ros2/rclcpp/blob/rolling/rclcpp/include/rclcpp/any_subscription_callback.hpp#L935 only callbacks with shared pointer generate less copies.
These links are not related with this comment but they could help with subscriptions in the future :)
Anyway I see, the best way is use std::optional
instead of reference and returning bool. Could you review my next commit?
//! getFilteredOdometryMessage. | ||
//! @return true if data is corrected otherwise false. | ||
//! | ||
bool publishPositionWithOdometry(nav_msgs::msg::Odometry filtered_position); |
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.
If we're sticking with reference types, is there any reason this isn't const ref?
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.
Half year ago I'm was experimenting with std::move()
and it was bad.
I have changed the argument to const ref.
//! | ||
void updateFilterWithMeasurements(const rclcpp::Time & time); | ||
|
||
//! @brief publish world to base link transform and position |
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.
Would this go over 100 characters without the line break?
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.
Yep. Fixed.
src/ros_filter.cpp
Outdated
{ | ||
nav_msgs::msg::Odometry filtered_position; | ||
if (getFilteredOdometryMessage(filtered_position)) { | ||
corrected_data = publishPositionWithOdometry(std::move(filtered_position)); |
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.
If you make this method take a const ref, there's no need for the std::move
. Not sure what that does in the context of a value parameter anyway.
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.
Fixed.
src/ros_filter.cpp
Outdated
} | ||
|
||
if (frame_id != map_frame_id_) { | ||
std::cerr << "Odometry message frame_id was " << |
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 long as you're here, you can replace any cerr
statements with the actual ROS 2 logging macros, and uncomment/update the ROS 1 macros further down.
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.
Fixed.
1622b3d
to
3d8534a
Compare
…rn std:optional instead of bool
Because method
RosFilter::periodicUpdate
is a big method, I cut into smaller methods.In some methods (
validateFilterOutput
,getFilteredAccelMessage
andgetFilteredOdometryMessage
) I changed an argument type from pointer to reference, because a pointer could be dangerous.