[Rock-dev] Roby::Planning::PlanningMethod

[Chris Mueller]

On 05.12.2011 12:12, Sylvain Joyeux wrote:
> I don't think that filtering defines and devices is going to fix your 
> general problem. The solutions I see:
>
>  * solution 1: explicitely tell your bridge which methods are
>    "local-only" and which are to be available on FIPA. At some point
>    you *will* create some methods to "support" other methods (i.e.
>    stuff that you don't want to be available on FIPA but should be in
>    the same Planner class than the others)
>  * solution 2: create a different planner class that you use only for
>    FIPA. I don't think it's going to completely fix your problem as you
>    will probably, at some point, create some "private" methods as
>    pointed out on solution 1.
>
You are right. The composition of different planning methods will also 
matter for the implementation of our standard. That's a good point.

I think that's maybe a good time for introducing a roby plugin for all 
fipa related stuff, where we can extend and create some classes with 
additional features without affecting other projects, that don't need to 
use fipa. And we don't need to change the general code base in roby for 
that issue.

I'll try to cope with your second solution. I currently don't know the 
capabilities of the reflection api ruby provides, but maybe i can also 
find a distinction between private and public methods and to create an 
array of planning methods only defined in e.g. new planner class 
(inheriting the MainPlanner).