Add support for unsetting parameters (track default values again) #26075
+154
−11
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Message PR is here: ArduPilot/mavlink#350 |
tridge
requested changes
Jan 24, 2024
|
I've discovered this is an absolutely terrible idea. If we remove from storage a value which is at its default value and there exists in storage a value from an old, unused storage key which has some conversion code then we may execute that conversion code again, leading to a non-default value. We need to purge from storage old, unused keys from storage. Which is probably impossible as we don't know what scripts are going to do, and when. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The general concept is to go through all of the same things we do when saving values, but instead of updating the value reset the key to a flag value. Once done searching for that parameter in storage will fail. The type is NOT changed so when scanning we know the size of the variable.
I'm quite aware this leaks storage. Future improvements would have us remember suitable empty slots for each type we might store and use them when storing. This is a major complication, IMO.