You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The existing Trajectory class has quite a few nice elements in my opinion and it would be worth reusing quite a few of them.
Notably, the "issues" that it has is that it defines and manages the following data structures:
std::deque<StateT> points_;
std::deque<std::chrono::nanoseconds> times_;
std::string reference_frame_; ///< name of the reference frame
std::vector<std::string> joint_names_; ///<
What could change:
points_ is a State type which means we are encapsulating a bit more than we perhaps need.
We could have a flatter representation of the Cartesian/Joint points in the derived classes.
times_ I think this is fine (at the point of writing at least)
reference_frame_ not really applicable for Joint types, should be pushed down to CartesianTrajectory
joint_names_ this time, not applicable to Cartesian types, should be pushed down to JointTrajectory
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The existing
Trajectory
class has quite a few nice elements in my opinion and it would be worth reusing quite a few of them.Notably, the "issues" that it has is that it defines and manages the following data structures:
What could change:
points_
is aState
type which means we are encapsulating a bit more than we perhaps need.We could have a flatter representation of the Cartesian/Joint points in the derived classes.
times_
I think this is fine (at the point of writing at least)reference_frame_
not really applicable for Joint types, should be pushed down to CartesianTrajectoryjoint_names_
this time, not applicable to Cartesian types, should be pushed down to JointTrajectoryThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: