Open the bag directory instead of a single file #80
Conversation
In ROS2, there is no longer a single rosbag file. Let the directory containing the various files be used as the "rosbag." Also, use a consistent proposed filename format for both the Record and Save dialogs. Finally, fix a minor issue in the raw view. Signed-off-by: Michael Jeronimo <[email protected]>
| @@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ def _add_msg_object(self, parent, path, name, obj, obj_type): | |||
|
|
|||
| elif type(obj) in [str, bool, int, long, float, complex, Time]: | |||
| # Ignore any binary data | |||
| obj_repr = codecs.utf_8_decode(str(obj).decode(), 'ignore')[0] | |||
| obj_repr = codecs.utf_8_decode(str(obj).encode(), 'ignore')[0] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change looks unrelated. Should it be included in this PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, doesn't have to be. I didn't know if it was worth a separate PR for a single line.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In general, I would try to keep changes focused on one thing for traceability (e.g. when reviewing commit history). I find it makes it easier to pinpoint where and why something was changed. It can also make porting/reverting specific changes easier when they are more focused.
In this case, we can leave it as-is since I see encode() was added in ROS 1 in #68, and I guess decode() was added accidentally during the port in #72 (independent of the ROS 1 change).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok. Yes, that's correct. Fixing an issue introduced accidentally.
In ROS2, there is no longer a single rosbag file. Let the directory
containing the various files be used as the "rosbag." Also, use a
consistent proposed filename format for both the Record and Save dialogs.
Finally, fix a minor issue in the raw view.
Signed-off-by: Michael Jeronimo [email protected]