Support multiple parameters callback #457

suab321321 · 2019-11-09T00:54:12Z

@allenh1 now #427 is continued here as my previous repos were a lot messy

allenh1 · 2019-11-09T16:50:41Z

@allenh1 now #427 is continued here as my previous repos were a lot messy

@suab321321 Please refrain from opening multiple pull requests. Instead, It's best to fix the original pull request instead.

rclpy/rclpy/node.py

dirk-thomas

Please add tests to cover the new API.

rclpy/rclpy/node.py

dirk-thomas

As mentioned before (#457 (review)) please add test coverage for the newly introduced API.

dirk-thomas · 2019-11-14T16:28:44Z

rclpy/rclpy/node.py

+        callback: Callable[[List[Parameter]], SetParametersResult]
+    ) -> None:
+        """
+        Add a callback in front to the list of callback.


@ivanpauno Can you comment why the C++ implementation inserts new callbacks before the already registered ones?

rclpy/rclpy/node.py

suab321321 · 2020-02-03T04:05:59Z

@jacobperron sir?

suab321321 · 2020-02-03T17:27:45Z

@jacobperron sir now is it okay?

jacobperron · 2020-02-03T17:59:04Z

The same test is still failing for me as I commented in #457 (comment)

Can you reproduce the test failure?

I am running the following commands to build and test this code:

colcon build --packages-up-to rclpy
colcon test --packages-select rclpy --ctest-args -R test_node --event-handlers console_direct+

The second command will limit the test to test_node.py and give you more detailed output about the failure.

Please fix the test.

allenh1 · 2020-02-03T19:18:24Z

The command git rebase HEAD~41 --signoff should reapply the last 41 commits on the current branch that is checked out, but with the "--signoff" option.

I think this inadvertently caused a large amount of older commits to get signed by @suab321321...

here we discovered that the first commit on this branch was waiting on @dirk-thomas's signoff, causing the DCO failure.

This branch is in a rather odd place... way too many changes and way too many commits... They should resolve after a squash merge though, right?

dirk-thomas · 2020-02-03T19:29:38Z

The PR is only being considered for merging once it has a "clean" commit list. That means only list commits related to the change proposed in this PR.

allenh1 · 2020-02-04T15:50:34Z

The PR is only being considered for merging once it has a "clean" commit list.

Yeah, I think that's wise.

Maybe git cherry-pick can salvage this one?

My suggestion here would be:

check out a temporary branch off the current ROS 2 master
git cherry-pick --signoff each individual commit on suab321321:master
Once you are 100% sure it is correct do a git branch -D for suab321321:master, and replace that branch with the temporary one
git push --force-with-lease the new master branch created by @suab321321 with the patches applied on top of the current master

Does this sound like a good approach? Just thinking out loud here.

suab321321 · 2020-02-04T16:56:01Z

@allenh1 sir now my commits are passing DCO checking..is this needed now?

suab321321 · 2020-02-04T19:21:38Z

@jacobperron sir now it is passing :)

allenh1 · 2020-02-04T21:27:32Z

@allenh1 sir now my commits are passing DCO checking..is this needed now?

@dirk-thomas has answered this already:

The PR is only being considered for merging once it has a "clean" commit list. That means only list commits related to the change proposed in this PR.

What I was recommending is a potential way to get this branch to the state required for merging. It doesn't feel right to me to use cherry-pick for this though, to be honest.

Anybody have any ideas for fixing this?

jacobperron

I've left some more comments reviewing the test code again.

rclpy/test/test_node.py

jacobperron · 2020-02-04T21:40:17Z

rclpy/test/test_node.py

+
+        self.node.remove_on_set_parameters_callback(self.reject_parameter_callback_1)
+
+        # Now the setting its value again.


This suggestion is still valid.

jacobperron · 2020-02-04T21:46:27Z

Anybody have any ideas for fixing this?

It might be easier to start a fresh branch off of master, copy the files with changes there, and do a single commit. After verifying the changes are the same as upstream, you can force push to this branch. I can do this after my latest comments are addressed.

allenh1 · 2020-02-04T21:50:43Z

Anybody have any ideas for fixing this?

It might be easier to start a fresh branch off of master, copy the files with changes there, and do a single commit.

Yeah, that's probably the cleanest fix. 👍

suab321321 · 2020-02-05T17:09:37Z

@jacobperron sir is it good now?

Signed-off-by: Jacob Perron <jacob@openrobotics.org> Signed-off-by: AbhinavSingh <singhabhinav9051571833@gmail.com>

jacobperron

@suab321321 The code looks good to me 👍 I've cleaned up the commit history and will trigger CI now:

Linux
Linux-aarch64
macOS
Windows
Windows-container (experimental, can be ignored)

rclpy/test/test_node.py

jacobperron

Thanks for the addition @suab321321!

Replaced by new API that supports multiple callbacks introduced in #457. Replaced references to the old API with the new API. Left tests for the old API that should be removed or updated when we remove the deprecated API. Signed-off-by: Jacob Perron <jacob@openrobotics.org>

suab321321 · 2020-02-06T04:05:44Z

thanks @jacobperron sir for merging and @allenh1 sir thank you so much for the guidance :)

Replaced by new API that supports multiple callbacks introduced in #457. Replaced references to the old API with the new API. Left tests for the old API that should be removed or updated when we remove the deprecated API. Signed-off-by: Jacob Perron <jacob@openrobotics.org>

suab321321 force-pushed the master branch 5 times, most recently from d85597e to 78cc5e8 Compare November 9, 2019 01:20

allenh1 reviewed Nov 9, 2019

View reviewed changes

rclpy/rclpy/node.py Show resolved Hide resolved

allenh1 reviewed Nov 9, 2019

View reviewed changes

rclpy/rclpy/node.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

allenh1 reviewed Nov 9, 2019

View reviewed changes

rclpy/rclpy/node.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

suab321321 force-pushed the master branch 4 times, most recently from 6c12b68 to b5b8a1e Compare November 12, 2019 15:02

dirk-thomas reviewed Nov 12, 2019

View reviewed changes

dirk-thomas added enhancement New feature or request in progress Actively being worked on (Kanban column) labels Nov 12, 2019

suab321321 mentioned this pull request Nov 12, 2019

Support multiple on parameter set callbacks #393 #427

Closed

suab321321 force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from c82cc61 to 6ce54c9 Compare November 12, 2019 22:23

allenh1 reviewed Nov 13, 2019

View reviewed changes

rclpy/rclpy/node.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

allenh1 reviewed Nov 13, 2019

View reviewed changes

rclpy/rclpy/node.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

allenh1 reviewed Nov 13, 2019

View reviewed changes

rclpy/rclpy/node.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

suab321321 force-pushed the master branch 3 times, most recently from 60dc705 to 74bc57c Compare November 13, 2019 18:42

dirk-thomas reviewed Nov 14, 2019

View reviewed changes

suab321321 force-pushed the master branch 4 times, most recently from 83230e3 to 1f0d44f Compare November 16, 2019 16:31

suab321321 force-pushed the master branch from cf2b015 to 12d4ba4 Compare February 4, 2020 19:20

jacobperron reviewed Feb 4, 2020

View reviewed changes

suab321321 force-pushed the master branch 2 times, most recently from 604a186 to 926364e Compare February 5, 2020 17:08

jacobperron force-pushed the master branch from 926364e to ca64e58 Compare February 5, 2020 18:09

Support multiple "on parameter set" callbacks

0926cbb

Signed-off-by: Jacob Perron <jacob@openrobotics.org> Signed-off-by: AbhinavSingh <singhabhinav9051571833@gmail.com>

jacobperron force-pushed the master branch from ca64e58 to 0926cbb Compare February 5, 2020 18:11

jacobperron reviewed Feb 5, 2020

View reviewed changes

rclpy/test/test_node.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

jacobperron approved these changes Feb 5, 2020

View reviewed changes

jacobperron merged commit 822f194 into ros2:master Feb 5, 2020

jacobperron removed the in progress Actively being worked on (Kanban column) label Feb 5, 2020

jacobperron mentioned this pull request Feb 5, 2020

Support multiple on parameter set callbacks #393

Closed

jacobperron mentioned this pull request Feb 6, 2020

Deprecate set_parameters_callback API #504

Merged

jacobperron mentioned this pull request Mar 10, 2020

Add Foxy release note for rclpy parameter callback methods ros2/ros2_documentation#558

Merged

clalancette mentioned this pull request Jun 29, 2022

[Foxy]: Fix type annotation for get_parameters_by_prefix. #964

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Support multiple parameters callback #457

Support multiple parameters callback #457

suab321321 commented Nov 9, 2019

allenh1 commented Nov 9, 2019

dirk-thomas left a comment

dirk-thomas left a comment

dirk-thomas Nov 14, 2019

suab321321 commented Feb 3, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 3, 2020

jacobperron commented Feb 3, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 3, 2020

dirk-thomas commented Feb 3, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 4, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 4, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 4, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 4, 2020

jacobperron left a comment

jacobperron Feb 4, 2020

jacobperron commented Feb 4, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 4, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 5, 2020

jacobperron left a comment •

edited

Loading

jacobperron left a comment

suab321321 commented Feb 6, 2020


		self.node.remove_on_set_parameters_callback(self.reject_parameter_callback_1)

		# Now the setting its value again.

Support multiple parameters callback #457

Support multiple parameters callback #457

Conversation

suab321321 commented Nov 9, 2019

allenh1 commented Nov 9, 2019

dirk-thomas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dirk-thomas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dirk-thomas Nov 14, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

suab321321 commented Feb 3, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 3, 2020

jacobperron commented Feb 3, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 3, 2020

dirk-thomas commented Feb 3, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 4, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 4, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 4, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 4, 2020

jacobperron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jacobperron Feb 4, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jacobperron commented Feb 4, 2020

allenh1 commented Feb 4, 2020

suab321321 commented Feb 5, 2020

jacobperron left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jacobperron left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

suab321321 commented Feb 6, 2020

jacobperron left a comment •

edited

Loading