RTC 1.0 NO IDEA Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

RTC — Inconsistent definition of LifeCycle::reset

  • 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


    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)


    reset() : ReturnCode_t

    ...as in RTC IDL (Page 75) and mars/2006-09-34 (Example C++ header)


    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


    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