mehulgoel873
commented
1 week ago Is this the final version of the trajectory setup? It seems like the files are still as coupled as before, how does prompting the trajectory class to publish a new trajectory each tick different from just having it return the trajectory directly?
This is correct, I haven't decoupled the files in the autonsystem just yet. This requires recreating how we treat the controllers and path planners, which I wanted to make a separate task due to the behemoth that is. However, since now all the information passed between both the controller and path planner happens only through a ros topic, it should be relatively simple to separate both into different ros nodes.
What type of PR is this? (check all applicable)
Description
Changes -- I created a pack and unpack function within the trajectory class that takes the positions and packs it into a ros msg that can be sent over ros topics.
The reasoning behind this is that this better separates the controller from the path planner to better reflect our software architecture and will make more sense overall.
The benefits behind this change is that the overall repository now has a chance for becoming cleaner and overall more likely to work.
Related Tickets & Documents
QA Instructions, Screenshots, Recordings
Please replace this line with instructions on how to test your changes, a note on the devices and browsers this has been tested on, as well as any relevant images for UI changes.
Added/updated tests?
We encourage you to keep the code coverage percentage at 80% and above.
I ran the single and double version of the buggy sim, and the code seemed to be working.
[optional] Are there any post deployment tasks we need to perform?
[optional] What gif best describes this PR or how it makes you feel?