-
Key: RTC-12
-
Legacy Issue Number: 10490
-
Status: closed
-
Source: Shibaura Institute of Technology ( Mr. Takeshi Sakamoto)
-
Summary:
ource: Technologic Arts (Takeshi Sakamoto, [[MailTo(tsakamoto AT SPAMFREE tech-arts DOT co DOT jp)]])
Severity: Minor
Disposition: Resolution Proposed
Summary
Which is correct as for the definition of !LifeCycle::reset?
reset(ExecutionContext) : ReturnCode_t
...as in Figure 7.2 (Page 11) and Table (Page 15)
Or:
reset() : ReturnCode_t
...as in RTC IDL (Page 75) and mars/2006-09-34 (Example C++ header)
Discussion
Resetting is relative to a particular execution context (see the lifecycle state machine), so I think it has to be the former:
reset(ExecutionContext) : ReturnCode_t
– RickWarren, 2006/11/27
Resolution
There has been a suggestion to move reset to ExecutionContext to make it similar to activate_component, deactivate_component, and get_component_state. The new operation would be called reset_component. The ExecutionContext would therefore be a kind of "manager" for the component's per-context state. – RickWarren, 2006/12/1
Revised Text
-
Reported: RTC 1.0b1 — Tue, 5 Dec 2006 05:00 GMT
-
Disposition: Resolved — RTC 1.0
-
Disposition Summary:
Resetting a component is relative to a given execution context. This behavior should be mediated by the context, just like component activation/deactivation. Move the reset operation to ExecutionContextOperations as reset_component.
-
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT