-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 152
Add support for capsule geometry type #238
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
4c8716d
Add support for capsule geometry type
saikishor 7f97ab8
Add documentation about versioning
saikishor 0a0d9a4
Add tests for the capsule geometry
saikishor be9fae5
remove invalid number checks for consistency
saikishor 6823576
Require version 2.1.0 of urdfdom_headers
scpeters File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
this is a good logic check, but none of the other geometry parsing functions have something like it
how do you feel about reverting this logic check from URDF 1.1 and open a separate pull request that will target rolling and add these logic checks to this and the other geometry parsing functions?
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.
As this is a new entry, I think it makes sense to have it integrated with the checks already. I personally would keep it.
For the rest of the geometry types, yes I already have a plan to do that for other types and rest of the components in the URDF
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.
What's your opinion on this?
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.
I think we shouldn't backport the additional logic checks for existing geometry types. So we can eventually merge them into rolling, but I wouldn't include those checks in URDF 1.1
A case could be made that for consistency, the Capsule code for URDF 1.1 that will be backported should also not include the checks. It's subjective, so I won't demand it
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.
Understood. I can remove them. I'll open a different PR adding such logic to all the geometry cases targeting rolling
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.
@scpeters Done
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.
I've the other checks done here: https://github.com/saikishor/urdfdom/tree/extend/invalid_data/checks
Once this is merged, I can open the new one
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.
👍