Lidar processing #49
Lidar processing #49
Conversation
…rDetection objects, adjusted _str_ to print on one line and include all relevant details
modules/lidar_oscillation.py
Outdated
| Representing a LiDAR Oscillation | ||
| """ | ||
|
|
||
| from lidar_detection import LidarDetection |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
import the module instead of the class - so instead use from . import lidar_detection
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is just to maintain consistency as well as to avoid confusion because some data structure files contain multiple classes so it is easier to trace back where each object is from this way.
modules/lidar_oscillation.py
Outdated
| __create_key = object() | ||
|
|
||
| @classmethod | ||
| def create(cls, readings: list[LidarDetection]) -> "tuple[bool, LidarOscillation | None]": |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
since we changed the import this would now be lidar_detection.LidarDetection
modules/lidar_oscillation.py
Outdated
| Create a new LidarOscillation object from a list of LidarReading objects. | ||
| """ | ||
| # Ensuring the list does not contain None values | ||
| if any(reading is None for reading in readings): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we can assume that every reading inside readings is valid so no need to check here. validation will be done in the lidar parser, not here in the data structure creation itself
modules/lidar_oscillation.py
Outdated
| assert class_private_create_key is LidarOscillation.__create_key, "Use the create() method" | ||
|
|
||
| self.readings = readings | ||
| valid_angles = [reading.angle for reading in readings if reading is not None] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not needed for reason above
modules/lidar_oscillation.py
Outdated
| """ | ||
| Create a new LidarOscillation object from a list of LidarReading objects. | ||
| """ | ||
|
|
modules/lidar_oscillation.py
Outdated
| self.readings = readings | ||
| angles = [reading.angle for reading in readings] | ||
|
|
||
| if angles: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
since we checked list is empty, we can assume there are valid angle readings so we can remove this check
made review changes, adjusted for linting