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

Improve RosMsgField typedef #83

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 5, 2020

Conversation

davidswinegar
Copy link
Collaborator

This union type adds complexity and isn't necessary. Also add the
value, which is parsed for constants but doesn't appear in the
type defintion. This will allow us to match the typedef in Webviz.

Test plan: only flow type change

This union type adds complexity and isn't necessary. Also add the
value, which is parsed for constants but doesn't appear in the
type defintion. This will allow us to match the typedef in Webviz.

Test plan: only flow type change
@davidswinegar davidswinegar requested a review from troygibb August 4, 2020 18:14
Copy link

@troygibb troygibb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks David!! Makes sense.

@davidswinegar davidswinegar merged commit 3692378 into master Aug 5, 2020
@davidswinegar davidswinegar deleted the dwinegar-improve-rosmsgs-typedef branch August 5, 2020 23:40
Stuk pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 5, 2023
This union type adds complexity and isn't necessary. Also add the
value, which is parsed for constants but doesn't appear in the
type defintion. This will allow us to match the typedef in Webviz.

Test plan: only flow type change
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants