Hi Ben,
If this is what you want to do, I would go with Blaise's suggestion and send
a goal using the action client with no callbacks registered.
However, I'm not really sure why you would want to have the
SimpleActionServer be active on null goal. Understanding your use case
would help us get a feel for exactly what functionality you need.
Vijay
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:44 AM, Blaise Gassend <
blaise@willowgarage.com>wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Axelrod, Benjamin <baxelrod@irobot.com>
> wrote:
> > I have an actionlib server and I would like to be able to trigger its own
> > goal. I don’t need any callbacks for goal accepted, feedback, or even
> > result. I just want to manually set the server to be active. Is this
> > possible? I can’t figure out a way to do this.
>
> Why don't you use a SimpleActionClient to set the goal? If you don't
> specify the callbacks when setting you call sendGoal, those callbacks
> default to being null. Is that not what you want?
>
>
> http://www.ros.org/doc/api/actionlib/html/classactionlib_1_1SimpleActionClient.html#ae6a2e6904495e7c20c59e96af0d86801
>
> > It might be nice if actionlib::SimpleActionServer::acceptNewGoal() was
> > overloaded to accept a goal parameter. That would set the server active,
> > but with NULL callbacks.
>
> Is there a strong reason for wanting to do this without explicitly
> having a client?
>
> Blaise
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users@code.ros.org
> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>
--
Vijay Pradeep
Systems Engineer
Willow Garage, Inc.
<
tfoote@willowgarage.com>
vpradeep@willowgarage.com
(text/plain)