Fix all deprecation warnings#108
Conversation
e081d31 to
cb7bf7a
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #108 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 0.00% 40.11% +40.11%
==========================================
Files 5 20 +15
Lines 352 526 +174
Branches 0 33 +33
==========================================
+ Hits 0 211 +211
+ Misses 352 310 -42
- Partials 0 5 +5
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
@nbbrooks @christophfroehlich this seems to make CI green per the last PR |
christophfroehlich
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
or maybe not, see my comment
| std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(50)); | ||
| } | ||
| resp->success = command_interfaces_[REACTIVATE_GRIPPER_RESPONSE].get_value(); | ||
| resp->success &= command_interfaces_[REACTIVATE_GRIPPER_RESPONSE].get_optional().has_value(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not familiar with this code here, but should this really be has_value()?
| resp->success &= command_interfaces_[REACTIVATE_GRIPPER_RESPONSE].get_optional().has_value(); | |
| if (resp->success &= command_interfaces_[REACTIVATE_GRIPPER_RESPONSE].get_optional().has_value()) { | |
| resp->success &= command_interfaces_[REACTIVATE_GRIPPER_RESPONSE].get_optional().value(); | |
| } |
This would have more similar logic to before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So get_value() returns a double, I think this was being implicitly cast before which is why I changed it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In fact, with some of the other changes in this PR using the value instead of a boolean expression causes a compilation error!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see the problem with the cast, but get_optional.has_value() is not the same as get_value() before. (as I said, I don't know what info is actually in the interface).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fair point, I kept the old behavior and left a comment for someone who knows what's supposed to happen to maybe fix it later
d25fc5c to
7413732
Compare
christophfroehlich
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see that I opened already a PR to fix some deprecations, but I close #98 then
Lots of deprecation warnings... ros2_control maintainers have been busy / this repo has been in need of love.
Would appreciate some testing if possible by someone who has a robotiq, but hopefully "it just works" ™️