actions are as you say very similar to services in their use but have more control and feedback. SMACH is designed to work as a coordination engine, strongly based on a state machine. SMACH has been designed that it is trivial to use an action as a state within a SMACH state machine. Thus we use SMACH and actionlib at the same time.
Tully
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:52 AM, Enea Scioni
<enea.scioni@student.unife.it> wrote:
HI all,
I'm following this topic but I'm also a bit confused..
In order to manage the whole system, composed as hundreds nodes, should I
use SMACH (instead actionlib)?
What is the " best practice " that ROS suggest? When should I use actionlib
and when SMACH?
Starting from the documentation (and my experiments), in a nutshell I see
actionlib more similar to a ROS Service, but with added features, as
possibilities to receive a feedback, delete the request and so on; to do
that actionlib use/implement an "internal" state machine in order to manage
the communication protocol on topic between the Action Server and Action
Client.
Is it true or I'm making a mistake?
Regards,
Enea Scioni
--
View this message in context: http://ros-users.122217.n3.nabble.com/actionlib-design-questions-tp1468507p1479561.html
Sent from the ROS-Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
--
Tully Foote
Systems Engineer
Willow Garage, Inc.
tfoote@willowgarage.com(650) 475-2827