You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
message IMU
{
/// \brief Optional header data
Header header = 1;
string entity_name = 2;
Quaternion orientation = 3;
/// Row major about x, y, z
Float_V orientation_covariance = 4;
Vector3d angular_velocity = 5;
/// Row major about x, y, z
Float_V angular_velocity_covariance = 6;
Vector3d linear_acceleration = 7;
/// Row major about x, y, z
Float_V linear_acceleration_covariance = 8;
}
There is no reason to re-enumerate fields of proto, it should have been like this:
It was probably done to keep similar fields grouped together. In hind sight, we should have added those new fields without changing the existing field positions. At this point, changing it in gz-msgs10 would break ABI, so I would not be in favor of that.
I can communicate beetween two different version of gz-msgs and gz-transport but updates on message version 10 break compatibility for no reason.
Example:
Version9
Version10
There is no reason to re-enumerate fields of proto, it should have been like this:
There is any specific reason why its like that?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: