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

Unexpected Behavior if State and Outcome have identical Names on branch "ros2-devel" #89

Open
tiko5000 opened this issue Jun 30, 2023 · 1 comment
Assignees

Comments

@tiko5000
Copy link

Given this setup:
If you try to connect outcome done of State A to the outcome A of the behavior.

grafik

The arrow automatically points to the State A itself, instead of the the outcome A of the behavior.

grafik

If connected to the outcome B of the behavior, the arrow automatically points to the State B instead of the the outcome B of the behavior.

grafik

The same inside a Concurrency Container: The Outputs can be connected.

grafik

@tiko5000 tiko5000 changed the title Unexpected Behavior if State and Outcome have identical Names (branch=ros2-devel) Unexpected Behavior if State and Outcome have identical Names on branch ros2-devel Jun 30, 2023
@tiko5000 tiko5000 changed the title Unexpected Behavior if State and Outcome have identical Names on branch ros2-devel Unexpected Behavior if State and Outcome have identical Names on branch "ros2-devel" Jun 30, 2023
@dcconner
Copy link
Member

Effectively these outcomes are same as a state for connecting transitions.
You rightfully argue that we should detect and prevent this conflict, so I will mark as enhancement for future development, but do not expect to be a near term priority.

To avoid, follow a standard naming convention. We normally use PascalCase for state names, and snake_case for outcomes.
So your container outcomes would be "a" and "b" which would not conflict.

@dcconner dcconner self-assigned this Jul 24, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants