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

Fix/visualization #1255

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 21, 2024
Merged

Fix/visualization #1255

merged 4 commits into from
May 21, 2024

Conversation

hakuturu583
Copy link
Collaborator

@hakuturu583 hakuturu583 commented May 20, 2024

Description

Abstract

In #1238, the ID of the visualization frame was changed to speed up the processing. At that time, there was an error in the implementation of coordinate conversion, and markers were not drawn correctly on the rviz.

Background

Execute the following command on the current master branch.

ros2 launch cpp_mock_scenarios mock_test.launch.py launch_rviz:=true timeout:=60.0 scenario:=acquire_position_in_world_frame

The following is displayed in rviz.

Screencast.from.05-21-2024.12.10.04.PM.webm

Details

The coordinate system of the various markers was modified to produce the following output.

Screencast.from.05-20-2024.04.47.35.PM.webm

References

#1238

Destructive Changes

Fix bug of geometry_msgs::msg::Point operator*(const geometry_msgs::msg::Point & point, const double value) function.

Known Limitations

#1256 This problem still remains, but if I fix this problem in this pull request, the diff will be to large so even if this PR is merged, the problem of double implementation remains.

Signed-off-by: hakuturu583 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: hakuturu583 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: hakuturu583 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: hakuturu583 <[email protected]>
@hakuturu583 hakuturu583 added the bump patch If this pull request merged, bump patch version of the scenario_simulator_v2 label May 20, 2024
@hakuturu583 hakuturu583 self-assigned this May 20, 2024
Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 20, 2024

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.

@hakuturu583 hakuturu583 marked this pull request as ready for review May 21, 2024 00:48
@hakuturu583 hakuturu583 requested a review from HansRobo May 21, 2024 00:54
Copy link
Member

@HansRobo HansRobo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It worked fine in my environment!

aaabaa-2024-05-21_11.59.48.mp4

@HansRobo HansRobo merged commit 8f04225 into master May 21, 2024
18 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the fix/visualization branch May 21, 2024 04:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bump patch If this pull request merged, bump patch version of the scenario_simulator_v2 wait for regression test
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants