[WBD] update `calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1` for iRonCub-Mk1_1

[HosameldinMohamed]

Related PR #113 which was done for iRonCub-Mk1. We modify the RPC command to be compatible with iRonCub-Mk1_1.

[HosameldinMohamed]

It's a simple PR but to be sure I am not forgetting anything!

[prashanthr05]

I believe you must also commit the autogenerated IDL files?

[HosameldinMohamed]

I believe you must also commit the autogenerated IDL files?

I suppose not @prashanthr05. After #131 we no longer save the autogenerated files.

[traversaro]

Why remove the old method calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1 ?

[HosameldinMohamed]

Why remove the old method calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1 ?

I wanted to avoid duplicating the code. Because the only change between the methods is in the idle thrust of the arms jets.

Also, I don't think we will be using iRonCub-Mk1 again, unless we really have to. But now that you raised this point. It's better to double-check with the team to have a definitive answer.

[traversaro]

Why remove the old method calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1 ?

I wanted to avoid duplicating the code. Because the only change between the methods is in the idle thrust of the arms jets.

We could have an helper method that just takes idle thrust and arm jets as parameters, and then you call that one on the different calibtStandingWithJets*** methods?

[traversaro]

Are you sure that it is ok to have a breaking change? If you prefer to still have calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1 you can still keep this method and just call calibStandingWithJetsiRonCub("mk1") in its implementation, but this is up do you.

[HosameldinMohamed]

Are you sure that it is ok to have a breaking change? If you prefer to still have calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1 you can still keep this method and just call calibStandingWithJetsiRonCub("mk1") in its implementation, but this is up do you.

@traversaro I see, Which of the two below did you mean?

• Did you mean the user should be able to call both calibStandingWithJetsiRonCub (passing a parameter) and calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1 (with a deprecation warning maybe?).

• Or did you mean the user should be able to call calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1 and calibStandingWithJetsiRonCubMk1_1, while both internally implement the same method?

Just to understand the better practice. But in this particular case, only the iRonCub team are using it. So I think it should be fine to add a breaking change.

[HosameldinMohamed]

Thanks!

[traversaro]

Yes I was referring to both cases you were referring to.

[HosameldinMohamed]

Yes I was referring to both cases you were referring to.

Ok. I agree that in general this kind of change can be harmful but in this case it should be ok. I added some documentation of the RPC commands #137.