Add RobotState msg #82
Conversation
WalkthroughThe changes introduce a new message definition for Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Robot
participant StateManager
Robot->>StateManager: Request current state
StateManager->>Robot: Respond with RobotState
Robot->>Robot: Update internal state using state_id
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (3)
msg/RobotState.msg (3)
1-5: LGTM! Consider adding comments for clarity.The constant definitions look good. The use of
int8is appropriate for this small set of states, and the naming convention is consistent. The order of states is logical, with ERROR being -1 and E_STOP (Emergency Stop) being 0, which is a common practice.Consider adding brief comments to explain what each state represents, especially for less obvious ones like DOCKING. This would improve the self-documentation of the message. For example:
int8 ERROR = -1 int8 E_STOP = 0 # Emergency Stop int8 STANDBY = 1 -int8 DOCKING = 2 +int8 DOCKING = 2 # Robot is in the process of docking int8 SUCCESS = 3
7-8: LGTM! Consider adding comments for clarity.The message fields are well-defined. The use of
int8forstate_idmatches the type used for the constants, and the inclusion of astring state_nameallows for a human-readable representation of the state.Consider adding brief comments to explain the purpose of these fields. For example:
+# Numeric identifier of the robot's current state int8 state_id +# Human-readable name of the robot's current state string state_nameThis would improve the self-documentation of the message and make it clearer for other developers using this message type.
1-8: Overall structure looks good. Consider future maintainability.The message structure is clear and provides a good balance between efficiency (using
int8forstate_id) and readability (usingstringforstate_name). This design allows for easy extension with additional states in the future.For future consideration:
- Ensure that the code using this message maintains consistency between
state_idandstate_name. You might want to consider creating a utility function or enum-like structure in your codebase to manage this relationship and prevent inconsistencies.- If the number of states grows significantly in the future, you might want to consider using a separate configuration file or message to define the mapping between
state_idandstate_name. This would allow for easier maintenance and potentially dynamic updating of state definitions.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- CMakeLists.txt (1 hunks)
- msg/RobotState.msg (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🔇 Additional comments (1)
CMakeLists.txt (1)
23-23: LGTM! The new RobotState message is correctly added.The addition of "msg/RobotState.msg" to the
rosidl_generate_interfacesfunction is correct and consistent with the existing structure. The placement and formatting align well with other message definitions.To ensure the RobotState.msg file exists and is properly located, you can run the following command:
✅ Verification successful
Verified: RobotState.msg file exists in the correct location.
The addition of
"msg/RobotState.msg"to therosidl_generate_interfacesfunction is correctly implemented and aligns with the existing structure.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Verify the existence of RobotState.msg file if [ -f "msg/RobotState.msg" ]; then echo "RobotState.msg file exists in the correct location." else echo "Error: RobotState.msg file not found in the expected location." fiLength of output: 144
| @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ rosidl_generate_interfaces( | |||
| "msg/LEDAnimationQueue.msg" | |||
| "msg/LEDImageAnimation.msg" | |||
| "msg/MotorControllerState.msg" | |||
| "msg/RobotState.msg" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not so sure about this name RobotState . It will be great to precise what the state means but I cannot find any alternatives for now.
I just leave it here ;)
msg/RobotState.msg
Outdated
| int8 SUCCESS = 3 | ||
|
|
||
| int8 state_id | ||
| string state_name |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The state_name is necessary? What is the reason?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I had some idea, but right now, you are right, it's not necessary
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | |||
| int8 ERROR = -1 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should add a std_msgs/Header for timestamp.
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | |||
| int8 ERROR = -1 | |||
| int8 E_STOP = 0 | |||
| int8 STANDBY = 1 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about IDLE or RUNNING? Nevertheless, STANDBY is also ok ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The animation of leds is READY_ANIM_ID so READY also sounds good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO STANDBY is the most precise.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Additional states could be: CHARGING, AUTONOMY, TELEOP, SLEEP.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
msg/RobotState.msg (1)
9-9: Add documentation for the state_id field.Consider adding a comment to clarify that this field should contain one of the defined state constants.
+# Current robot state. Valid values are defined by the constants above. int8 state_id
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
- msg/RobotState.msg (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
msg/RobotState.msg (1)
7-7: LGTM! Good use of standard header.Including std_msgs/Header is a good practice for timestamping and frame information.
| int8 ERROR = -1 | ||
| int8 E_STOP = 0 | ||
| int8 STANDBY = 1 | ||
| int8 DOCKING = 2 | ||
| int8 SUCCESS = 3 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🛠️ Refactor suggestion
Consider revising the state definitions for completeness and clarity.
The current state definitions could be improved in several ways:
- Missing common robot operational states (e.g., CHARGING, AUTONOMY, TELEOP)
- SUCCESS seems more like an operation result than a robot state
- State values could be better organized (e.g., grouping error states, operational states)
Consider reorganizing the states like this:
-int8 ERROR = -1
-int8 E_STOP = 0
-int8 STANDBY = 1
-int8 DOCKING = 2
-int8 SUCCESS = 3
+# Error states
+int8 ERROR = -2
+int8 E_STOP = -1
+
+# Operational states
+int8 STANDBY = 0
+int8 AUTONOMY = 1
+int8 TELEOP = 2
+int8 CHARGING = 3
+int8 DOCKING = 4Also, consider adding comments to document what each state represents.
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| int8 ERROR = -1 | |
| int8 E_STOP = 0 | |
| int8 STANDBY = 1 | |
| int8 DOCKING = 2 | |
| int8 SUCCESS = 3 | |
| # Error states | |
| int8 ERROR = -2 | |
| int8 E_STOP = -1 | |
| # Operational states | |
| int8 STANDBY = 0 | |
| int8 AUTONOMY = 1 | |
| int8 TELEOP = 2 | |
| int8 CHARGING = 3 | |
| int8 DOCKING = 4 |
Summary by CodeRabbit
RobotStatemessage definition to enhance robot state communication.ERROR,E_STOP,STANDBY,DOCKING, andSUCCESS.