Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Save map builder options in options proto. Rename it to BuilderOptions. #1504

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ojura
Copy link
Contributor

@ojura ojura commented Jan 17, 2019

@ojura
Copy link
Contributor Author

ojura commented Jan 17, 2019

I verified that the pbstream info tool correctly prints out the map builder options for .pbstreams produced with this version of Cartographer. For older pbstreams it just prints out an empty string for map builder options.

CHECK(ReadNextSerializedData(&all_trajectory_builder_options_))
<< "Serialized stream misses `AllTrajectoryBuilderOptions`.";
CHECK(all_trajectory_builder_options_.has_all_trajectory_builder_options())
CHECK(ReadNextSerializedData(&builder_options_))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this break compatibility?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@ojura ojura Feb 14, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is the same proto, just renamed to builder options (instead of all trajectory builder options), since it now contains the map builder options as well.

Also I mentioned above that I tested it with bags built by upstream Cartographer, it works okay (prints a blank line for nonexisting map builder options).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh yes, true!

@bochen87
Copy link

@ojura this was reviewed and approved a long time ago but somehow not merged. It is now outdated and has many conflicts. Do you still have time to resolve the conflict?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants