Question: how to integrate the Livox-SDK into a OOP structure?. #37

New Issue

2020-04-02T11:16:54+02:00

lasdasdas commented

2020-04-02 11:16:54 +02:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Hi. I am trying to integrate the drivers into my own software and I am having some problems.

The use of global objects for the callbacks (i.e. SetDeviceStateUpdateCallback SetBroadcastCallback LidarStartSampling ...) is not viable in my case. I have to put all the global objects as non static members of a class. I have seen that some of the callbacks use a void pointer to pass generic data structures to the callbacks, however some of the others don't. I have tried std::bind (which would be perfect for this case) .
For instance:

void OnDeviceInfoChangeCustom(MyCustomClass* a, const DeviceInfo *info, DeviceEvent type) {
//...
}
//And then

SetDeviceStateUpdateCallback(std::function<...> (std::bind(OnDeviceInfoChangeCustom, this, _1, _2)

However this is not working either. Partially because SetDeviceStateUpdateCallback expects the type DeviceStateUpdateCallback only to cast it later into a more flexible std::function (just since today)/boost::function).

Do you have any recommendation for this situation?.
Thank you very much.

Hi. I am trying to integrate the drivers into my own software and I am having some problems. The use of *global* objects for the callbacks (i.e. ```SetDeviceStateUpdateCallback``` ```SetBroadcastCallback``` ```LidarStartSampling``` ...) is not viable in my case. I have to put all the global objects as non static members of a class. I have seen that some of the callbacks use a void pointer to pass *generic* data structures to the callbacks, however some of the others don't. I have tried std::bind (which would be perfect for this case) . For instance: ```c++ void OnDeviceInfoChangeCustom(MyCustomClass* a, const DeviceInfo *info, DeviceEvent type) { //... } //And then SetDeviceStateUpdateCallback(std::function<...> (std::bind(OnDeviceInfoChangeCustom, this, _1, _2) ``` However this is not working either. Partially because SetDeviceStateUpdateCallback expects the type DeviceStateUpdateCallback only to cast it later into a more flexible std::function (just since today)/boost::function). Do you have any recommendation for this situation?. Thank you very much.

Livox-SDK commented

2020-04-10 05:36:12 +02:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Hi @lasdasdas ，
Thank you for your proposal !
We will plan to provide C++ interface which make it easier to intergrate into OOP structure.

Hi @lasdasdas ， Thank you for your proposal ! We will plan to provide C++ interface which make it easier to intergrate into OOP structure.

fjserrano commented

2020-04-13 13:30:08 +02:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Hi @Livox-SDK.

I can suggest apart of make a std::function and std::bind for a Interface OOP (I thinks is the best) other method to implement in C++. You can make a Interface by polling data where we need to request the new data from SDK for any handle, only is a idea.

Best Regards.

Hi @Livox-SDK. I can suggest apart of make a std::function and std::bind for a Interface OOP (I thinks is the best) other method to implement in C++. You can make a Interface by polling data where we need to request the new data from SDK for any handle, only is a idea. Best Regards.

Livox-SDK commented

2020-04-16 06:13:16 +02:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Hi @fjserrano ,

Thank you for your suggestion ! we will take it into consideration carefully.

Hi @fjserrano , Thank you for your suggestion ! we will take it into consideration carefully.

lasdasdas commented

2020-04-16 20:51:52 +02:00

(Migrated from github.com)

It is a good idea. Also, some of the functions have a free void pointer that can be used to pass anything you need (DeviceInformationCallback, SetDataCallback) however others do not ( DeviceStateUpdateCallback...) Maybe @Livox-SDK can explain the reasons for this interface decision. If all callbacks had a void pointer, using classes would be trivial as the class object itself could be passed as this

It is a good idea. Also, some of the functions have a free void pointer that can be used to pass anything you need (DeviceInformationCallback, SetDataCallback) however others do not ( DeviceStateUpdateCallback...) Maybe @Livox-SDK can explain the reasons for this interface decision. If all callbacks had a void pointer, using classes would be trivial as the class object itself could be passed as ```this```

This repo is archived. You cannot comment on issues.

1 Participants

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: mmr/Livox-SDK#37