fix(traffic_light): don't call addTrafficLight() when the traffic light id has already existed in map

[satoshi-ota]

Description

The following function in traffic_light_base.cpp is quite heavy because it always tries adding traffic light even when the traffic light has been registered in simulator.

auto TrafficLightsBase::getTrafficLight(const lanelet::Id traffic_light_id) -> TrafficLight &
{
  addTrafficLight(traffic_light_id);
  return traffic_lights_map_.at(traffic_light_id);
}

As a result, it becomes a bottle neck of simulator when I write a code to update traffic light color frequently.

Abstract

I added the guard to prevent redundant process like this:

diff --git a/simulation/traffic_simulator/src/traffic_lights/traffic_lights_base.cpp b/simulation/traffic_simulator/src/traffic_lights/traffic_lights_base.cpp
index 48110784a..906e80258 100644
--- a/simulation/traffic_simulator/src/traffic_lights/traffic_lights_base.cpp
+++ b/simulation/traffic_simulator/src/traffic_lights/traffic_lights_base.cpp
@@ -123,6 +123,10 @@ auto TrafficLightsBase::addTrafficLight(const lanelet::Id traffic_light_id) -> v
 
 auto TrafficLightsBase::getTrafficLight(const lanelet::Id traffic_light_id) -> TrafficLight &
 {
+  if (isTrafficLightAdded(traffic_light_id)) {
+    return traffic_lights_map_.at(traffic_light_id);
+  }
+
   addTrafficLight(traffic_light_id);
   return traffic_lights_map_.at(traffic_light_id);
 }

Background

N/A

Details

With this PR, I confirmed the process load became light.

References

N/A

Destructive Changes

N/A

Known Limitations

N/A

[github-actions]

Checklist for reviewers ☑️

All references to "You" in the following text refer to the code reviewer.

• Is this pull request written in a way that is easy to read from a third-party perspective?
• Is there sufficient information (background, purpose, specification, algorithm description, list of disruptive changes, and migration guide) in the description of this pull request?
• If this pull request contains a destructive change, does this pull request contain the migration guide?
• Labels of this pull request are valid?
• All unit tests/integration tests are included in this pull request? If you think adding test cases is unnecessary, please describe why and cross out this line.
• The documentation for this pull request is enough? If you think adding documents for this pull request is unnecessary, please describe why and cross out this line.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud