-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Set default alpha value to 255 #1385
Set default alpha value to 255 #1385
Conversation
In the unit test, CopyIfFieldExists<PointXYZRGBNormal, float> (p, "rgb", is_rgb, rgb_val) Then when the functor is applied in the if (name_ == pcl::traits::name<PointInT, Key>::value)
{
exists_ = true;
typedef typename pcl::traits::datatype<PointInT, Key>::type T;
const uint8_t* data_ptr = reinterpret_cast<const uint8_t*>(&pt_) + pcl::traits::offset<PointInT, Key>::value;
value_ = static_cast<OutT> (*reinterpret_cast<const T*>(data_ptr));
} Here I think we can not apply your change, because it may affect existing user code the same way it affects unit tests. Your "second option" proposed in the previous discussion was only about changing IO functions, guess we should go that way. |
ef55903
to
fff1de6
Compare
There are still some tests failing, can you fix them?
#1040 should be fixed after this pull request is merged. |
cbbb638
to
d75c3d2
Compare
We're good, aren't we? |
I didn't manage to check what is failing in the test Hough3DGrouping but if it's not related to the error, we're good. |
It shouldn't be. That test is failing for the majority (if not all) of the (current) PRs. |
Squash? |
d75c3d2
to
7530b36
Compare
I think we are good to merge this one and close #1141. |
aeaf606
to
75e922b
Compare
* Vary alpha values in PCDReaderWriterASCIIColorPrecision test * Save RGB as integer all point types * Change default alpha value to 255. * Adjust tests to new alpha values * Print rgb values as ints in streaming operators * Allow rgb fields to be of type uint32 and rgba fields to be of type float
75e922b
to
ba9b36c
Compare
Hey there,
this is my suggestion to issue #1141. Some tests are failing compared to the master branch these commits are based on:
At first I looked at CopyIfFieldExists where the expected value has to change. But the value I was expecting based on my calculations still was not the result of the test. For the other two, I don't have any idea. So perhaps you guys do.
Cheers,
Stefan