-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Fixes for Galactic Devel #1
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ if(NOT (LIBSWIPL_INCLUDE_DIR AND LIBSWIPL_LIBRARY)) | |||
swipl | |||
libswipl | |||
PATHS | |||
${SWIPL_BASE}/../ |
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.
Does this compensate for a different "prefix"?
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 believe so but it might be more specific to my setup (building within Nix environment).
@@ -966,9 +966,6 @@ | |||
sub_atom(Func, 0, Pre, _, Package). | |||
|
|||
load_type_support(Package) :- | |||
rwm_c_identifier(Id), |
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.
Should this not be conditional on the ROS2 version?
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.
That's a good point. which ROS 2 version is this project claiming to be compatible with? The last LTS is Humble but my patch here just deals with Galactic. Have not tried with Humble yet.
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'm happy if you adjust the PR. I'm also happy to do so myself, but I can't test this in my current setup. Notable just removing the load from load_type_support/1 worries me.
@@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ free_rcl_node(void* ptr) | |||
static foreign_t | |||
ros_create_node(term_t Context, term_t Name, term_t Node, term_t Options) | |||
{ rcl_context_t *context; | |||
rclswi_node_t *node; | |||
rclswi_node_t *node = NULL; |
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.
Looks like this is to avoid an uninitialized warning? The correct fix seems to be to move rcl_node_init() inside the if (rc) block, no?
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.
we don't want to move that there because the node
variable is also used on line 686 when we call the rcl_node_init
. That being said, we can probably simply remove the if (rc)
line since that variable is not changed anywhere.
@@ -1545,7 +1545,7 @@ free_rcl_clock(void *ptr) | |||
static foreign_t | |||
ros_create_clock(term_t Context, term_t Type, term_t Clock) | |||
{ rcl_context_t *context; | |||
rcl_clock_type_t type; | |||
rcl_clock_type_t type = RCL_ROS_TIME; |
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.
Looks like an uninitialized warning as well? It is actually right. The if at line 1557 should have an else return FALSE
.
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.
Yes, that is an uninitialized warning. The compiler will attempt all code paths and generate such a warning if it finds one resulting in an uninitialized variable.
Always a good idea to initialize things.
Very minor adjustment to support ROS2 Galactic release.