Set the resample_dt_ member of TOTG back to const

[AndyZe]

Based on the comment here: #1771 (comment)

Shuffle a function around so that the resample_dt_ member of TOTG can be const again.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 0.00% // Head: 50.27% // Increases project coverage by +50.27% 🎉

Coverage data is based on head (ab04222) compared to base (62e6f9e).
Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           main    #1776       +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage      0   50.27%   +50.27%     
=========================================
  Files         0      374      +374     
  Lines         0    31277    +31277     
=========================================
+ Hits          0    15722    +15722     
- Misses        0    15555    +15555     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...ry_processing/time_optimal_trajectory_generation.h	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...cessing/src/time_optimal_trajectory_generation.cpp	88.32% <100.00%> (ø)
...t_core/distance_field/src/find_internal_points.cpp	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
moveit_core/collision_detection/src/world.cpp	88.11% <0.00%> (ø)
...ude/pilz_industrial_motion_planner_testutils/lin.h	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
moveit_core/kinematic_constraints/src/utils.cpp	23.55% <0.00%> (ø)
...eit_core/collision_detection/src/collision_env.cpp	72.58% <0.00%> (ø)
.../src/bullet_integration/contact_checker_common.cpp	84.73% <0.00%> (ø)
...de/pilz_industrial_motion_planner_testutils/circ.h	41.67% <0.00%> (ø)
...gins/include/moveit_setup_app_plugins/launches.hpp	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 366 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[henningkayser]

Thanks for fixing this so quickly. Only request would be to change the free function name to include TOTG somewhere, since trajectory_processing::computeTimeStamps() doesn't reveal that.