-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
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
Introducing lift delete button #511
Introducing lift delete button #511
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.
Interesting, I was thinking something a lot simpler (just iterating over waypoints and removing the lift_cabin
property if it matches the deleted lift name, leaving everything else intact) but I can see why it could be helpful to automatically remove the lift vertices and edges that lead into the lift.
I'm very slightly concerned about this break, this will mean that as soon as one waypoint with the matching lift_cabin
property is found it will stop iterating, which "might" behave unexpectedly if there are more waypoints with that property, which will not be cleaned up properly. Now this is usually not the case but other parts of the code dealing with such property don't have the assumption that there will never be more than one (i.e. here https://github.com/TanJunKiat/rmf_traffic_editor/blob/7a55fbd1d695059f3ee5bc40a4601cbb2c27c9f3/rmf_traffic_editor/gui/lift_dialog.cpp#L441-L449, you can see that a flag is set to denote it as found but the loop doesn't early exit).
The test failures seem mostly related to uncrustify, you should be able to reproduce with a local |
96fdd35
to
7a55fbd
Compare
Right now the implementation is a nested I am also worried on the situation where the lift cabin name is changed manually via the property panel which results in unsuccessful deletion of the vertex after deleting the lift. |
Yap I know there are two nested if statements to make sure the lift matches, it's more a "what would happen if there was more than one lift with the requested |
Alright, what we can do is do remove the |
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 iterating!
Ah sorry last hurdle, we need commits to be signed https://docs.github.com/authentication/managing-commit-signature-verification/about-commit-signature-verification, can you do that and force-push to this PR? |
7c6a127
to
124f821
Compare
c14907d
to
124f821
Compare
Sorry, still trying to fumble around with the signature. Will get to it asap. |
b232973
to
cb1056d
Compare
Signed-off-by: tanjunkiat <tanjunkiat@outlook.sg>
768123d
to
12309f7
Compare
Thanks for iterating! (Sign offs can be painful the first time :) ) |
Continuation of #509
Implementation summary
lift_table
to remove lift from map and yam