[ros-users] REP 3: Target Platforms updates for Fuerte and Groovy

[Ken Conley]

I should add, C++ 11 and Python 3 are great topics for ROSCon! ;)

http://roscon.ros.org/?page_id=31

 - Ken

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Ken Conley <kwc at willowgarage.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Ingo Lütkebohle <iluetkeb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> what about "official" Python 3 support, at least in the core libraries?
>
> A general response to, "is X officially supported?"
>
> 'official' support usually means:
>
>  1. There are tests/continuous integration for it
>  2. Someone supports it
>
> The TUM guys did a great job getting us a lot of the way there and
> their patches have been incorporated, but #1 and #2 are still not
> present.  The patches also don't cover command-line tools, just the
> libraries exercised by MORSE.
>
> Python 3 compatibility requires fairly complete coverage tests; I have
> been refactoring the Python libraries to make this easier for someone
> who wants to take this on, but there is no Py3k continuous
> integration.  Py3k tests require a different set of assumptions
> regarding strings, bytes, unicode, and iterators -- as an example, it
> was possible to create filenames in 3.0 and 3.1 that Py3k programs
> could not open.
>
> Similarly, for #2, the general rules is that someone has to use the
> thing being supported, as you can't support something you don't use.
> We can provide resources, such as build farm resources, to someone who
> does wish to take on this role.
>
> We will continue to accept patches relating to Python 3, so long as
> they don't break Python 2, and I will continue to update code to a
> dual 2/3 style as I encounter it.  Trickier issues, such as the
> bytes/string representation issues, remain active areas of work [1].
>
>  - Ken
>
> [1]: http://answers.ros.org/question/2032/smach-introspection-server-fails-in-electric?answer=4499#4499
>
>> I'm asking specifically because we're currently using Blender and/or
>> MORSE, which requires Python 3. The TUM guys have already done some
>> work to port ROS messaging to Python 3, but as far as I know that is
>> not official, yet.
>>
>> cheers,
>> Ingo
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 10:17 AM, Ken Conley <kwc at willowgarage.com> wrote:
>>> 2011/11/7 Stéphane Magnenat <stephane at magnenat.net>:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> What is the plan w.r.t. C++11? Now that the standard is out, and that a
>>>> large part of features are available in recent g++ releases, we will see
>>>> many upstream libraries going for it. As upstream developer, it is clearly
>>>> always a question of whether to adopt such a recent standard, but given the
>>>> huge speed-up in development it brings in some cases, I have decided to go
>>>> for using features that are at least in gcc 4.4.
>>>
>>> The topic wasn't brought up during the Thirdparty SIG meeting.  The
>>> approximation of that topic is that Lucid is the current lower
>>> watermark (gcc 4.4) for integration in Fuerte and Groovy will move to
>>> Oneiric (gcc 4.6).
>>>
>>> GCC C++ 11 status (still 'experimental'): http://gcc.gnu.org/projects/cxx0x.html
>>>
>>> It's always possible to reconvene the SIG to discuss C++ 11 more
>>> specifically; I'm coordinator but I do not pretend to be knowledgeable
>>> in that issue.
>>>
>>>  - Ken
>>>
>>>>
>>>> To allow integration of recent code from research, I think that ROS should,
>>>> whenever possible, embrace C++11.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Stéphane
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dr Stéphane Magnenat
>>>> http://stephane.magnenat.net
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ros-users mailing list
>>>> ros-users at code.ros.org
>>>> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ros-users mailing list
>>> ros-users at code.ros.org
>>> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ingo Lütkebohle
>> Bielefeld University
>> http://www.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/~iluetkeb/
>>
>> PGP Fingerprint 3187 4DEC 47E6 1B1E 6F4F  57D4 CD90 C164 34AD CE5B
>> _______________________________________________
>> ros-users mailing list
>> ros-users at code.ros.org
>> https://code.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>
>