Use own implementation of stod()

[christophfroehlich]

Use own implementation of stod(), see ros-controls/ros2_control#1257

[christophfroehlich]

@Mergifyio backport humble iron

[mergify]

backport humble iron

✅ Backports have been created

• #445 Use own implementation of stod() (backport #428) has been created for branch humble
• #446 Use own implementation of stod() (backport #428) has been created for branch iron

[olivier-stasse]

While compiling the demos I got the following problem:

--- stderr: ros2_control_demo_example_14
/usr/bin/ld: CMakeFiles/ros2_control_demo_example_14.dir/hardware/rrbot_sensor_for_position_feedback.cpp.o: in function `hardware_interface::stod(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&)':
rrbot_sensor_for_position_feedback.cpp:(.text+0x3a): multiple definition of `hardware_interface::stod(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&)'; CMakeFiles/ros2_control_demo_example_14.dir/hardware/rrbot_actuator_without_feedback.cpp.o:rrbot_actuator_without_feedback.cpp:(.text+0xb): first defined here
/usr/bin/ld: CMakeFiles/ros2_control_demo_example_14.dir/hardware/rrbot_sensor_for_position_feedback.cpp.o: in function `hardware_interface::parse_bool(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&)':
rrbot_sensor_for_position_feedback.cpp:(.text+0x1cb): multiple definition of `hardware_interface::parse_bool(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&)'; CMakeFiles/ros2_control_demo_example_14.dir/hardware/rrbot_actuator_without_feedback.cpp.o:rrbot_actuator_without_feedback.cpp:(.text+0x19c): first defined here
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
gmake[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/ros2_control_demo_example_14.dir/build.make:257: libros2_control_demo_example_14.so] Error 1
gmake[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:137: CMakeFiles/ros2_control_demo_example_14.dir/all] Error 2
gmake: *** [Makefile:146: all] Error 2
---

[olivier-stasse]

I guess that the best is to make lexical_casts a cpp file like Moveit https://github.com/ros-planning/moveit/blob/3d2105584f414f2494eebff17122b398721d9c2a/moveit_core/utils/src/lexical_casts.cpp

[christophfroehlich]

I saw that also in the CI and was not sure if this is an artifact of old binary packages. Not sure where this comes from, when I understand it I'm happy to change this to a cpp file.

[saikishor]

I saw that also in the CI and was not sure if this is an artifact of old binary packages. Not sure where this comes from, when I understand it I'm happy to change this to a cpp file.

@christophfroehlich it seems like we need to separate them into header and cpp files, if not we will have this linking issue with multiple definitions. Shall I do it for you? or do you want to do it?

[saikishor]

Needs minor changes in the parent repository of the hardware_interfaces to avoid these linking errors.
The current changes LGTM

[olivier-stasse]

LGTM with PR #1281

[christophfroehlich]

thanks @saikishor, semi-binary builds now. Should we wait for the merge until the next release and sync of ros2_control?

[saikishor]

thanks @saikishor, semi-binary builds now. Should we wait for the merge until the next release and sync of ros2_control?

If this or the prior changes are never released, it is better to wait. However, 90% of people who use ros2_control in rolling probably compile from source.

[christophfroehlich]

However, 90% of people who use ros2_control in rolling probably compile from source.

not sure about that, I'd just wait

[saikishor]

not sure about that, I'd just wait

Yes, let's wait for the release and the sync. I think we should also have waiting_for_sync tags, they are useful in these cases.