Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
[rcl_action] Implement goal handle #320
[rcl_action] Implement goal handle #320
Changes from 6 commits
a73f640
b461814
0873ff1
21cd91f
49a3812
4855f8b
d1fa431
29f0183
8c65da8
a24280f
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
nit,
rcl_action_goal_handle_is_valid()
also checks ifgoal_handle
isNULL
. This check could be removed.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.
Following the service/client implementations in rcl, I thought we could make the distinction of an invalid argument vs. invalid object (ie, null argument vs uninitialized struct). But I now see that this logic is not consistent in rcl. For example,
client.c
makes the distinction:rcl/rcl/src/rcl/client.c
Lines 198 to 208 in 1120b2f
subscription.c
does not:rcl/rcl/src/rcl/subscription.c
Lines 267 to 276 in 1120b2f
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.
Then it's a good opportunity to make it consistent :)
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.
Removed the check (and other similar redundant checks) in 8c65da8
Rather than distinguishing a null pointer vs uninitialized object by return code, we can use the error message instead.
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.
Follow-up for
rcl
#321