Skip to content
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

Add parameter type name field to spec #396

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 14, 2023
Merged

Conversation

achim-k
Copy link
Collaborator

@achim-k achim-k commented Mar 14, 2023

Public-Facing Changes

  • Add optional parameter field type

Description

Adds the optional field type to the Parameter struct for cases where the parameter type can't be deduced from the type of the value field alone.

@achim-k achim-k requested a review from jtbandes March 14, 2023 17:48
@achim-k achim-k merged commit bf9d82b into main Mar 14, 2023
@achim-k achim-k deleted the achim/add_param_type_name_field branch March 14, 2023 22:08
achim-k added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 14, 2023
### Public-Facing Changes
None

### Description
Should have done that in #396
achim-k added a commit to foxglove/ros-foxglove-bridge that referenced this pull request Mar 24, 2023
### Public-Facing Changes
- Add support for byte array params [ROS2]

### Description
Adds support for byte array parameters according to the ws-protocol
specification update made in
foxglove/ws-protocol#396

Fixes #198
pezy pushed a commit to pezy/ws-protocol that referenced this pull request Jul 27, 2023
### Public-Facing Changes
- Add optional parameter field `type`

### Description
Adds the optional field `type` to the Parameter struct for cases where
the parameter type can't be deduced from the type of the `value` field
alone.
pezy pushed a commit to pezy/ws-protocol that referenced this pull request Jul 27, 2023
### Public-Facing Changes
None

### Description
Should have done that in foxglove#396
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants