New KeeperMotion #1560
New KeeperMotion #1560
Conversation
| keeper_jump_left_joints_command: | ||
| Input<MotorCommands<Joints<f32>>, "keeper_jump_left_joints_command">, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Renaming suggestion: keeper_jump_left_joints_command -> keeper_jump_left_motor_commands to be consistent with walk_motor_commands
| keeper_jump_left_joints_command: | ||
| Input<MotorCommands<Joints<f32>>, "keeper_jump_left_joints_command">, | ||
| keeper_jump_right_joints_command: | ||
| Input<MotorCommands<Joints<f32>>, "keeper_jump_right_joints_command">, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
-> keeper_jump_*_motor_commands
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You didn't rename all instances correctly! motor_command != motor_commands
| if context.motion_selection.current_motion == MotionType::KeeperJumpLeft { | ||
| self.interpolator | ||
| .advance_by(last_cycle_duration, context.condition_input); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please extract context.condition_input into a variable like the last_cycle_duration, similar to the other motion files.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now please also add a newline between the if and the variables. I know I'm very picky, but all files are exactly written like this so I would like to keep this as consistent as possible 🙃
| #[context] | ||
| #[derive(Default)] | ||
| pub struct MainOutputs { | ||
| pub keeper_jump_left_joints_command: MainOutput<MotorCommands<Joints<f32>>>, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please rename keeper_jump_left_joints_command -> keeper_jump_left_motor_commands
larskna
force-pushed
the
spring_zur_Seite_keepy
branch
from
5d0b0d7 to
187bdb5
Compare
Why? What?
renamed the WideStance to KeeperMotion and added JumpDirections for the GoalKeeper
Fixes #
I have to do a little bit tuning
How to Test
I want to test it in a test Game please, so we can it see all