-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 197
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
New approach for toMsg()/fromMsg() #427
base: rolling
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
c09c38f
to
23da8c7
Compare
5c886e3
to
3951ce6
Compare
@gleichdick OK, I think all of the other ones have been merged now. When you get a chance, a rebase of this one would be appreciated (or I can do it if you don't have time). Once we have that done, we can take a look at the current state of this. |
3951ce6
to
15d0012
Compare
So here we go... |
Not at the moment, no. It turns out that we need to revamp how the custom allocators are done since they don't quite work right at present. Until we know what that solution looks like, let's just stay away from the custom allocators. |
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.
@gleichdick , do you mind to fix the conflicts?
15d0012
to
101f0a2
Compare
Just did a rebase |
13efa1f
to
1660d92
Compare
Tests for wrench conversion, Eigen <-> KDL and the error messaging facilities from convert.h
they were disabled because of MSVC and ADL (MSVC couldn't choose between tf2::toMsg and Eigen::toMsg)
1660d92
to
66ad137
Compare
The fixups for the header includes and the doxygen comments are now squashed. |
Hi there, Any update on this ? |
6dc6520
to
00e3209
Compare
Well, I started working on this PR almost one year ago. Indeed, it is pretty big and hard to review, but I think this redesign of geometry2 is necessary. |
Hey, is this planned to be merged? |
@gleichdick I'm assigning myself to this PR since it's gotten so stale and I'd like to get this merged... Do you think this is this still necessary, and if so, would you be able to rebase it? |
f017422
to
66ad137
Compare
I'm sorry, I stopped using ROS more than a year ago. I don't have any clue on how big the impact is on downstream projects, but things will break for sure. And the ros2 branch has moved quite a bit. I don't see myself spending more time on this. But in my mind the reasons why I wrote this PR are still valid |
Alright, I understand; thanks so much for your contributions so far! |
@methylDragon I'm going to reopen this, as I do think the idea here is valid. It's just that this is a large change, so needs a lot of thought. |
I agree that this is something that would be great to bring in and modernize this part of the API. But it's also something that we'll need to think closely about and make sure that there's a good design document or possibly REP with a migration path clearly defined as well as appropriate deprecation process with so many people potentially using this. |
This is a rewrite of #368. Depends (more or less) on #422, #423, #424, #425 and #425, so it should be rebased and merged once these PRs are merged. First actual commit of this PR is 68a1193.