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

Instruction Start State Update #157

Closed

Conversation

marip8
Copy link
Contributor

@marip8 marip8 commented Jan 7, 2022

Currently the start state of most composite instructions (especially nested composite instructions) are never changed from NullInstructions. The reason for this is that usually the start instruction of one composite usually duplicates the last instruction of the previous composite, such as in the case of a robot trajectory. To avoid duplicating waypoints, the start instructions of most subsequent composites are left empty. However, this can be problematic when trying to use a nested composite instruction as a seed for another instruction or when using the composite instruction on its own. It also makes the composite instruction confusing to interpret since it is missing its first waypoint.

This PR updates the instruction flatten functions to ignore start instructions from composites that are not the first in a container. This retains the current behavior for the assembly of trajectories from nested composite instructions. This PR also changes the simple planner utility getInterpolatedComposite to put the first state of the interpolation as the start instruction of the composite, such that the entire interpolation is captured in the composite instruction.

This change is required for the OMPL planner refactor in #138

@marip8 marip8 requested a review from Levi-Armstrong January 7, 2022 22:34
@marip8 marip8 mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2022
12 tasks
@Levi-Armstrong
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think this will break things but are have you ran the tesseract_ros_examples to make sure they still work?

@marip8
Copy link
Contributor Author

marip8 commented Jan 13, 2023

Closing; this seems to have been invalidated by #268

@marip8 marip8 closed this Jan 13, 2023
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.

2 participants