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

[21352] Refactor TopicDataType #5066

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Jul 18, 2024
Merged

[21352] Refactor TopicDataType #5066

merged 14 commits into from
Jul 18, 2024

Conversation

richiware
Copy link
Member

@richiware richiware commented Jul 12, 2024

Description

Implementation of XCDR introduces new functions in TopicDataType class. But the old one remained. This PR removes them before launching the major version 3, and also performs additional refactorings:

  • Change method names to snake_case and have more meaningful names.
  • Change arguments from pointer to reference where applicable
  • Use std::string instead of char* on name getters and setters

Depends on:

Contributor Checklist

  • Commit messages follow the project guidelines.
  • The code follows the style guidelines of this project.
  • N/A Tests that thoroughly check the new feature have been added/Regression tests checking the bug and its fix have been added; the added tests pass locally
  • Any new/modified methods have been properly documented using Doxygen.
  • N/A Any new configuration API has an equivalent XML API (with the corresponding XSD extension)
  • ❌ Changes are backport compatible: they do NOT break ABI nor change library core behavior.
  • ❌ Changes are API compatible.
  • N/A New feature has been added to the versions.md file (if applicable).
  • N/A New feature has been documented/Current behavior is correctly described in the documentation.
  • N/A Applicable backports have been included in the description.

Reviewer Checklist

  • The PR has a milestone assigned.
  • The title and description correctly express the PR's purpose.
  • Check contributor checklist is correct.
  • N/A If this is a critical bug fix, backports to the critical-only supported branches have been requested.
  • Check CI results: changes do not issue any warning.
  • Check CI results: failing tests are unrelated with the changes.

@richiware richiware changed the title Remove old TopicDataType functions [21352] Remove old TopicDataType functions Jul 12, 2024
include/fastdds/dds/topic/TopicDataType.hpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
include/fastdds/dds/topic/TopicDataType.hpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/cpp/fastdds/publisher/DataWriterImpl.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/cpp/fastdds/publisher/DataWriterImpl.hpp Show resolved Hide resolved
include/fastdds/dds/topic/TopicDataType.hpp Show resolved Hide resolved
@richiware richiware requested review from MiguelCompany and removed request for MiguelCompany July 15, 2024 10:41
@github-actions github-actions bot added the ci-pending PR which CI is running label Jul 15, 2024
@richiware richiware requested review from MiguelCompany and removed request for MiguelCompany July 15, 2024 10:44
include/fastdds/dds/topic/TopicDataType.hpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
include/fastdds/dds/topic/TopicDataType.hpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
include/fastdds/dds/topic/TopicDataType.hpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/cpp/fastdds/subscriber/history/DataReaderHistory.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/cpp/fastdds/xtypes/dynamic_types/DynamicPubSubType.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
MiguelCompany
MiguelCompany previously approved these changes Jul 17, 2024
Copy link
Member

@MiguelCompany MiguelCompany left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM with green CI

MiguelCompany
MiguelCompany previously approved these changes Jul 17, 2024
Copy link
Member

@MiguelCompany MiguelCompany left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM with green CI

@richiware richiware requested review from MiguelCompany and removed request for MiguelCompany July 17, 2024 09:54
@richiware richiware requested review from MiguelCompany and removed request for MiguelCompany July 17, 2024 14:00
@richiware richiware added skip-ci Automatically pass CI and removed ci-pending PR which CI is running labels Jul 18, 2024
@richiware
Copy link
Member Author

CI passed in 977befe

Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
Signed-off-by: Ricardo González Moreno <ricardo@richiware.dev>
@MiguelCompany MiguelCompany added no-test Skip CI tests if PR marked with this label and removed skip-ci Automatically pass CI labels Jul 18, 2024
@MiguelCompany MiguelCompany requested review from MiguelCompany and removed request for MiguelCompany July 18, 2024 08:33
@github-actions github-actions bot added the ci-pending PR which CI is running label Jul 18, 2024
@richiware richiware merged commit 50b6494 into master Jul 18, 2024
13 of 14 checks passed
@richiware richiware deleted the feature/21349 branch July 18, 2024 10:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ci-pending PR which CI is running no-test Skip CI tests if PR marked with this label
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants