Orocos Toolchain 2.6 Components features

Hi All,

what is the alternative method in 2.6 of the command() method in 1.x, I wonder if it is replaced by another feature or it has removed at all..

Orocos Toolchain 2.6 Components features

You can use an "operation" configured with a "ClientThread" parameter.

But as the port interface has been improved, you'd better challenge the
choice of commands against sending a "cmd" msg in a port as Operation
requires that you are aware of thread safety (which is a pity when using
such a framework...).

Maybe this would help :
http://www.orocos.org/wiki/rtt/rtt-20/upgrading-rtt-1x-20

Notice that a auto-updater script is available, you should have a try
(don't forget to save your stuff before, who knows what'll happen).

2015-04-20 2:38 GMT+02:00 <alaaeldeen [dot] abdalrahman [..] ...>:

> Hi All,
>
> what is the alternative method in 2.6 of the command() method in 1.x, I
> wonder if it is replaced by another feature or it has removed at all..
> --
> Orocos-Users mailing list
> Orocos-Users [..] ...
> http://lists.mech.kuleuven.be/mailman/listinfo/orocos-users
>

Orocos Toolchain 2.6 Components features

On Apr 19, 2015, at 08:55 PM, Willy Lambert <lambert [dot] willy [..] ...> wrote:

You can use an "operation" configured with a "ClientThread" parameter. 

But as the port interface has been improved, you'd better challenge the choice of commands against sending a "cmd" msg in a port as Operation requires that you are aware of thread safety (which is a pity when using such a framework...).
 
Well you do and you don't have to be aware of thread safety with Operations. That's the point of the Own vs Client thread distinction. 

Maybe this would help :
http://www.orocos.org/wiki/rtt/rtt-20/upgrading-rtt-1x-20 

Notice that a auto-updater script is available, you should have a try (don't forget to save your stuff before, who knows what'll happen).

This script does indeed help with syntactic changes, but it absolutely does not help with semantic differences between v1 and v2. And that is really the hard part - the break in backwards compatibility is the true obstacle you have to overcome when porting from v1 to v2. And IMHO questions exactly like this, "what is the new form of Commands", is what you need to consider more up front, than the syntax changes.

HTH
S

2015-04-20 2:38 GMT+02:00 <alaaeldeen [dot] abdalrahman [..] ...>:
Hi All,

what is the alternative method in 2.6 of the command() method in 1.x, I
wonder if it is replaced by another feature or it has removed at all..
 

Orocos Toolchain 2.6 Components features

On Apr 19, 2015, at 20:55, Willy Lambert <lambert [dot] willy [..] ...> wrote:

> You can use an "operation" configured with a "ClientThread" parameter.
>
> But as the port interface has been improved, you'd better challenge the choice of commands against sending a "cmd" msg in a port as Operation requires that you are aware of thread safety (which is a pity when using such a framework...).
>
> Maybe this would help :
> http://www.orocos.org/wiki/rtt/rtt-20/upgrading-rtt-1x-20
>
> Notice that a auto-updater script is available, you should have a try (don't forget to save your stuff before, who knows what'll happen).

Operation + ClientThread is not quite the same thing. It really depends on the semantics of how you were using Commands in your v1 application.

For instance, Operations (Client or Own Thread) do not offer the completion function aspect of v1 Commands. This can be a huge semantic difference, and has cost us a huge amount of time in porting our v1 app. We actually ended up using a mix of Operations + a scripting function, to largely replace what the v1 Command offered.

HTH
S

>
> 2015-04-20 2:38 GMT+02:00 <alaaeldeen [dot] abdalrahman [..] ...>:
> Hi All,
>
> what is the alternative method in 2.6 of the command() method in 1.x, I
> wonder if it is replaced by another feature or it has removed at all..
> --

Orocos Toolchain 2.6 Components features

Thanks, willy that is exactly what I want to know..