API review

Proposer: Tully Foote

Present at review:

• Tully
• Ken
• Brian
• Wim
• Patrick

Question / concerns / comments

I would like to finalize this as it's getting used more and more and is a core of our system.

Tony has done a first cut at implementing the changes needed to actually impoement ros::Time::now() in roscpp so that it will work as per the spec. Please review the spec and we will merge it in after the sessions branch has merged.

• We had the ambiguous constructors, and we have had some discussion of what the right constructors are.

For clarity I'm thinking about removing anything but the default constructor to make sure people don't make this mistake https://prdev.willowgarage.com/trac/ros/ticket/795 thoughts?

• JL: Given our adoption of boost, at the very least we need to make sure that it is easy to convert between ros::Time/Duration and boost:time

Meeting agenda

To be filled out by proposer based on comments gathered during API review period

Conclusion

• Won't export to boost::time, because there's no reasonable use case. Using boost::time timed waits and such won't work properly anyway. We have to rely on our own implementations of such things in rostime.
• Remove the ros::Time(int), add back the ros::Time(double), taking seconds.
• Merge Tony's roscpp patch for making ros::Time::now() get rostime if so indicated by param server.
  • But modify to make ros::Time create the singleton and make roscpp modify / overwrite if ros::Time is to be used.
  • Make sure that locking is done properly.
• Update rospy to obey ros::Time param value
• Document use of ros::Time param value
• Figure out proper use of ros::Time param value, and who sets it.

Package status change (also mark change on PackageStatusDict page)

• Action items that need to be taken.

• Major issues that need to be resolved