Added RTDEClient constructor with vector recipes

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 100.00% and project coverage change: +0.14% :tada:

Comparison is base (f328157) 70.21% compared to head (45965ce) 70.35%.

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #143 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 70.21% 70.35% +0.14% ========================================== Files 69 69 Lines 2535 2547 +12 Branches 324 324 ========================================== + Hits 1780 1792 +12 Misses 568 568 Partials 187 187 ``` | [Files Changed](https://app.codecov.io/gh/UniversalRobots/Universal_Robots_Client_Library/pull/143?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=UniversalRobots) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [include/ur\_client\_library/rtde/rtde\_client.h](https://app.codecov.io/gh/UniversalRobots/Universal_Robots_Client_Library/pull/143?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=UniversalRobots#diff-aW5jbHVkZS91cl9jbGllbnRfbGlicmFyeS9ydGRlL3J0ZGVfY2xpZW50Lmg=) | `100.00% <ø> (ø)` | | | [src/rtde/rtde\_client.cpp](https://app.codecov.io/gh/UniversalRobots/Universal_Robots_Client_Library/pull/143?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=UniversalRobots#diff-c3JjL3J0ZGUvcnRkZV9jbGllbnQuY3Bw) | `55.80% <100.00%> (+1.77%)` | :arrow_up: |

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[urrsk]

@dagare Thanks for this good suggestion. It would be great If you could add some test to cover and verify this in the PR. A suggestion could be to extend this test file: https://github.com/UniversalRobots/Universal_Robots_Client_Library/blob/master/tests/test_rtde_client.cpp

[dagare]

I will make a new addition to this PR

[RobertWilbrandt]

Agreed, i think moving the file handling out of RTDEClient would be a good step.

[urrsk]

I will suggest we add the support first. When we can consider to deprecate the file dependent constructor later

[urmahp]

Before merging I suggest that we add checks in the constructor to see if the recipes are empty and whether "timestamp" is part of the output_recipe.

[urmahp]

Thank you for the contribution @dagare.