Skip to content
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

Calculate Jacobian Inverse #92

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

francesco-donofrio
Copy link

This PR introduces a method for computing the Jacobian inverse, along with a corresponding KDL implementation.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 15, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 94.44444% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 88.05%. Comparing base (4d6bada) to head (5ac1077).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...ics_interface_kdl/src/kinematics_interface_kdl.cpp 90.47% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #92      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   80.20%   88.05%   +7.85%     
==========================================
  Files           4        4              
  Lines         197      226      +29     
  Branches       35       41       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits          158      199      +41     
+ Misses         28       15      -13     
- Partials       11       12       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 88.05% <94.44%> (+7.85%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
...lude/kinematics_interface/kinematics_interface.hpp 100.00% <ø> (ø)
kinematics_interface/src/kinematics_interface.cpp 90.00% <100.00%> (+12.22%) ⬆️
...terface_kdl/test/test_kinematics_interface_kdl.cpp 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...ics_interface_kdl/src/kinematics_interface_kdl.cpp 78.94% <90.47%> (+11.94%) ⬆️

@progtologist
Copy link
Member

Please add some unit tests to improve coverage

Copy link
Contributor

@christophfroehlich christophfroehlich left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As already mentioned, please consider adding some unit tests.
And I'd prefer to use the new method also in
convert_cartesian_deltas_to_joint_deltas instead of duplicating the calculation?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants