Amcl refactorization #77
Conversation
mhpanah
commented
Sep 10, 2018
mhpanah
commented
- Created map directory and transfered map.h header file to map directory to be consistent with other libraries.
- Updated ament_target_dependencies for costmap to contain correct dependencies.
- Commented out unused parameters from cpp file to eliminate compiler warnings
- For C files had to cast unused parameters with void to eliminate warnings.
- TODO: decide what to do with [-Wpedantic].
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At first I was unsure whether you could leave out certain function parameters that are being commented out, but it appears they are from an interface. On ROS callbacks, I'm not positive that all parameters are required (ex. request_header), but I think it's okay for now
| @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ void map_free(map_t *map) | |||
| // Get the cell at the given point | |||
| map_cell_t *map_get_cell(map_t *map, double ox, double oy, double oa) | |||
| { | |||
| (void)oa; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is 'oa' even a parameter if it isn't used? Should it be removed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was trying to not change the code for this commit and start modifying the code in next phase by removing all the unnecessary parameters, changing functions, classes, etc.
| @@ -472,6 +471,7 @@ int pf_resample_limit(pf_t *pf, int k) | |||
| // Re-compute the cluster statistics for a sample set | |||
| void pf_cluster_stats(pf_t *pf, pf_sample_set_t *set) | |||
| { | |||
| (void)pf; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should 'pf' be removed?
| @@ -185,6 +185,7 @@ int pf_kdtree_get_cluster(pf_kdtree_t *self, pf_vector_t pose) | |||
| // Compare keys to see if they are equal | |||
| int pf_kdtree_equal(pf_kdtree_t *self, int key_a[], int key_b[]) | |||
| { | |||
| (void)self; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should 'self' be removed?
|
@mkhansen-intel - Agreed. I need to create an issue to de-boostify the code to meet ROS2 Developer guideline. That was my plan. |
|
@mhpanah - the last change looks good to me. Are there any other pending changes? If not and you have issues open for remaining refactors & clean ups, I think we can merge this. |
|
I've created an issue to eliminate the usage of boost library from the code. |
* AGVFM-555 use parallel node in pallet pickup, to ensure smooth operation. * remove unnecessary spin recovery node
