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 fail callback and missing docstrings to params #357

Merged

Conversation

epaezrubio
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@epaezrubio
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm looking forward to some feedback about this PR 😃

@mvollrath
Copy link
Contributor

Looks good, tests are unhappy though.

@epaezrubio
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm unsure how to run the tests. If I have done it correctly, the tests pass in my machine. Moreover, how are the failed fibonacci tests related to these changes?

@mvollrath
Copy link
Contributor

This seems relevant: RobotWebTools/rosbridge_suite#528

@MatthijsBurgh
Copy link
Contributor

@EzraBrooks @sea-bass I think this PR is worth reviewing.

Copy link
Contributor

@sea-bass sea-bass left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is a great addition.

Would you be able to modify the simple.html example to show this functionality?

Copy link
Contributor

@EzraBrooks EzraBrooks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a simple enough change, since it's just surfacing the underlying service callbacks, that I don't feel it needs additional testing or examples (given that the JSDoc comments indicate the usage). It's also an important addition - I myself have an application where I need to handle Param set failures in which I currently cannot without this change.

Thanks!

@EzraBrooks EzraBrooks merged commit 5efa9c3 into RobotWebTools:develop Nov 28, 2023
3 checks passed
@MatthijsBurgh
Copy link
Contributor

@EzraBrooks is this a breaking change? I need to know whether to include this change in the final v1 release.

@EzraBrooks
Copy link
Contributor

This is non-breaking, it only added an optional argument.

MatthijsBurgh added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
Co-authored-by: Matt Vollrath <matt@endpoint.com>
Co-authored-by: Matthijs van der Burgh <MatthijsBurgh@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: Jihoon Lee <jihoonlee.in@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Ezra Brooks <ezra@brooks.cx>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants