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

Make checkKin optional in debug #1043

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

marrts
Copy link
Contributor

@marrts marrts commented Sep 6, 2024

If a manipulator group has a lot of joints the kinematic check can take a very long time. This optionally removes that check which was previously always run in debug mode.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 6, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.60%. Comparing base (a2750a9) to head (369ddb8).
Report is 38 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1043      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.86%   89.60%   -0.27%     
==========================================
  Files         280      284       +4     
  Lines       15908    15990      +82     
==========================================
+ Hits        14296    14328      +32     
- Misses       1612     1662      +50     

see 25 files with indirect coverage changes

@Levi-Armstrong
Copy link
Contributor

I do not think this is necessary because it should only run if built in debug mode. This should run if you build in release.

@Levi-Armstrong
Copy link
Contributor

Is this check running when built in release?

@marrts
Copy link
Contributor Author

marrts commented Sep 14, 2024

Is this check running when built in release?

No, but I was developing in debug with a high DOF system and it was taking 30+ seconds to run the check which was annoying. At first I thought something broke.

I figured this way it wouldn't introduce any breaking changes but would just allow users to get around it if they need to test something else

@Levi-Armstrong
Copy link
Contributor

I would prefer not to make this type of change, but instead update the if statement to also check if TESSERACT_ENABLE_TESTING is enabled which should solve the issue you are having. These types of checks are intended to be ran during unit tests.

@Levi-Armstrong
Copy link
Contributor

Replaced by PR #1048

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