Path trackin conditon node by silanus23 · Pull Request #5602 · ros-navigation/navigation2

silanus23 · 2025-10-13T14:26:19Z

Basic Info

Info	Please fill out this column
Ticket(s) this addresses	#5037
Primary OS tested on	Ubuntu
Robotic platform tested on	nav2 bringup
Does this PR contain AI generated software?	util test
Was this PR description generated by AI software?	nope

Description of contribution in a few bullet points

Description of documentation updates required from your changes

BT node addition
max_error parameter
If there is a document for it maybe upcoming xml

Description of how this change was tested

I tried to take inspiration from is_battery_low condition node. I created unit tests too.

Future work that may be required in bullet points

There is an upcoming xml I will put this in

<RateController hz="3.0">
          <Fallback name="PathTrackingRecoveryPlanner">
            <IsWithinPathTrackingBounds max_tracking_error="2.0" />
            <Fallback name="TieredReplanning">
              <ComputePathToPose goal="{goal}" path="{path}" planner_id="{selected_planner}" error_code_id="{compute_path_error_code}" error_msg="{compute_path_error_msg}"/>
              <Sequence>
                <ClearEntireCostmap name="ClearGlobalCostmap-Tier2" service_name="global_costmap/clear_entirely_global_costmap"/>
                <RetryUntilSuccessful num_attempts="1">
                  <ComputePathToPose goal="{goal}" path="{path}" planner_id="{selected_planner}" error_code_id="{compute_path_error_code}" error_msg="{compute_path_error_msg}"/>
                </RetryUntilSuccessful>
              </Sequence>
            </Fallback>
          </Fallback>
        </RateController>

place this in navigating path through pose xml.

Note:

I had to take out every file with copy paste to a new branch. Cause I had created this branch as a sub branch of the last messy branch. This was the only clean choice that can save me.
I think this will solve my cycling comments and confused commits problem.

For Maintainers:

Check that any new parameters added are updated in docs.nav2.org
Check that any significant change is added to the migration guide
Check that any new features OR changes to existing behaviors are reflected in the tuning guide
Check that any new functions have Doxygen added
Check that any new features have test coverage
Check that any new plugins is added to the plugins page
If BT Node, Additionally: add to BT's XML index of nodes for groot, BT package's readme table, and BT library lists
Should this be backported to current distributions? If so, tag with backport-*.

mergify · 2025-10-13T15:27:49Z

@silanus23, your PR has failed to build. Please check CI outputs and resolve issues.
You may need to rebase or pull in main due to API changes (or your contribution genuinely fails).

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

SteveMacenski · 2025-10-13T21:58:37Z

nav2_behavior_tree/nav2_tree_nodes.xml

      <input_port name="battery_topic">Topic for battery info</input_port>
    </Condition>

+    <Decorator ID="IsWithinPathTrackingBounds">


For docs: this needs to be having its configuration guide page + add to Navigation Plugins table + migration guide with the larger feature description

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

codecov · 2025-10-24T10:48:53Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
...ition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`

... and 18 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

SteveMacenski

My sincere apologoes for the gross delay - ROSCon + vacation + time to get back to speed meant that some things didn't get my time until today. Overall this looks great and its just small quibbles and we should be able to merge this soon!

Can this be moved from a draft? Did you test this to work well?

For docs: this needs to be having its configuration guide page + add to Navigation Plugins table + migration guide with the larger feature description


+   if (!getInput("max_error_left", max_error_left_)) {
+     RCLCPP_ERROR(logger_, "max_error_left parameter not provided");
+     return BT::NodeStatus::FAILURE;
+   }
+ 
+   if (max_error_left_ < 0.0) {
+     RCLCPP_WARN(logger_, "max_error_left should be positive, using absolute value");
+     max_error_left_ = std::abs(max_error_left_);
+   }
+ 
+   if (!getInput("max_error_right", max_error_right_)) {
+     RCLCPP_ERROR(logger_, "max_error_right parameter not provided");
+     return BT::NodeStatus::FAILURE;
+   }
+ 
+   if (max_error_right_ < 0.0) {
+     RCLCPP_WARN(logger_, "max_error_right should be positive, using absolute value");
+     max_error_right_ = std::abs(max_error_right_);
+   }

These lines should be covered in tests

SteveMacenski · 2025-11-27T01:01:08Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+: BT::ConditionNode(condition_name, conf),
+  last_error_(std::numeric_limits<double>::max())
+{
+  auto node = config().blackboard->get<nav2::LifecycleNode::SharedPtr>("node");


Set logger_ = node->get_logger();

SteveMacenski · 2025-11-27T01:03:30Z

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

+  rclcpp::Logger logger_{rclcpp::get_logger("is_within_path_tracking_bounds_node")};
+  rclcpp::CallbackGroup::SharedPtr callback_group_;
+  rclcpp::executors::SingleThreadedExecutor callback_group_executor_;
+  rclcpp::Subscription<nav2_msgs::msg::TrackingFeedback>::SharedPtr tracking_feedback_sub_;


Use nav2::Subscription

SteveMacenski · 2025-11-27T01:03:50Z

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

+    };
+  }
+
+private:


Suggested change

private:

protected:

SteveMacenski · 2025-11-27T01:04:04Z

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

+  double max_error_left_{1.5};
+  std::chrono::milliseconds bt_loop_duration_;
+
+  void trackingFeedbackCallback(const nav2_msgs::msg::TrackingFeedback::SharedPtr msg);


Move this before the variables; all methods before all variables please. Also needs doxygen documentation for the API

silanus23 · 2025-12-04T17:16:02Z

@SteveMacenski I hope ROSCon went well. I’d love to join one myself when I get the chance. I’ve made some changes in this and other PRs, but I’m having trouble testing them right now cause the costmap keeps crashing after launch. I’m not sure yet whether it’s my local setup or something in the repo. I’ll push the updates as soon as I can get things running again. BTW I gave a shot about to add MPPI critic too. I will open it's PR too.

SteveMacenski · 2025-12-04T18:25:47Z

Great! I didn't see any update in other PRs, but I assume that's coming soon. I'm passing off the initial reviews here to @mini-1235 since this is related to one of his tasks, but I'll follow up for a final review once he approves

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR adds a new BT condition node IsWithinPathTrackingBounds to monitor whether a robot's deviation from its planned path exceeds configurable bounds.

Key Changes:

Introduces IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsCondition BT node that subscribes to tracking_feedback topic to check if the robot is within acceptable tracking error bounds
Supports asymmetric bounds (separate thresholds for left and right deviations)
Includes comprehensive unit tests covering various scenarios (symmetric/asymmetric bounds, edge cases, missing parameters)

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 7 out of 7 changed files in this pull request and generated 17 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
nav2_bt_navigator/behavior_trees/navigate_to_pose_w_replanning_and_recovery_w_path_hug.xml	Example behavior tree XML demonstrating usage of the new condition node with path tracking recovery and replanning
nav2_behavior_tree/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp	Header file defining the IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsCondition class with subscription to tracking feedback
nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp	Implementation of the condition node with parameter validation and asymmetric bound checking
nav2_behavior_tree/test/plugins/condition/test_is_within_path_tracking_bounds.cpp	Comprehensive unit tests covering various scenarios including symmetric/asymmetric bounds, edge cases, and missing parameters
nav2_behavior_tree/test/plugins/condition/CMakeLists.txt	Build configuration to include the new test executable
nav2_behavior_tree/nav2_tree_nodes.xml	Registration of the new BT node for Groot and XML-based behavior trees
nav2_behavior_tree/CMakeLists.txt	Build configuration to compile the new condition node plugin

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

nav2_bt_navigator/behavior_trees/navigate_to_pose_w_replanning_and_recovery_w_path_hug.xml

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

nav2_behavior_tree/nav2_tree_nodes.xml

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

nav2_bt_navigator/behavior_trees/navigate_to_pose_w_replanning_and_recovery_w_path_hug.xml

Copilot · 2025-12-05T12:17:06Z

nav2_behavior_tree/test/plugins/condition/test_is_within_path_tracking_bounds.cpp

+TEST_F(IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsConditionTestFixture, test_missing_max_error_left)
+{
+  // Test behavior when max_error_left parameter is not provided
+  std::string xml_txt =
+    R"(
+      <root BTCPP_format="4">
+        <BehaviorTree ID="MainTree">
+            <IsWithinPathTrackingBounds max_error_right="1.0"/>
+        </BehaviorTree>
+      </root>)";
+
+  auto tree = factory_->createTreeFromText(xml_txt, config_->blackboard);
+
+  publishAndSpin(0.5);
+  EXPECT_EQ(tree.tickOnce(), BT::NodeStatus::FAILURE);
+}
+
+TEST_F(IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsConditionTestFixture, test_missing_max_error_right)
+{
+  // Test behavior when max_error_right parameter is not provided
+  std::string xml_txt =
+    R"(
+      <root BTCPP_format="4">
+        <BehaviorTree ID="MainTree">
+            <IsWithinPathTrackingBounds max_error_left="1.0"/>
+        </BehaviorTree>
+      </root>)";
+
+  auto tree = factory_->createTreeFromText(xml_txt, config_->blackboard);
+
+  publishAndSpin(-0.5);
+  EXPECT_EQ(tree.tickOnce(), BT::NodeStatus::FAILURE);
+}


[nitpick] Incomplete test coverage: The tests test_missing_max_error_left and test_missing_max_error_right verify that FAILURE is returned, but they don't verify that the expected error messages are logged. The implementation logs "max_error_left parameter not provided" and "max_error_right parameter not provided" errors, but these aren't validated in the tests.

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

mergify · 2025-12-05T12:57:21Z

@silanus23, your PR has failed to build. Please check CI outputs and resolve issues.
You may need to rebase or pull in main due to API changes (or your contribution genuinely fails).

mini-1235 · 2025-12-05T13:03:12Z

@silanus23 can you pull in / rebase main, we had some CI issues that should be fixed now

mini-1235 · 2025-12-08T10:12:19Z

@silanus23 can you open a docs PR in https://github.com/ros-navigation/docs.nav2.org? I am fixing the CI today, once it is fixed, I will review this PR again

mini-1235

@silanus23 Can you pull in / rebase main again? I think the build failure should be fixed now

mini-1235 · 2025-12-09T10:41:22Z

nav2_bt_navigator/behavior_trees/navigate_to_pose_w_replanning_and_recovery_w_path_hug.xml

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+
+<!--


I think this should be reverted, but we could provide a minimal example in the migration guide

I think it would be good to have a xml demo of using this BT node, but maybe for now doing something more basic like after the FollowPath node, check if its not within bounds. If so, log something. I'm not sure right now what good 'generic' recovery action I would recommend if it is required to be in bounds but is now found to be out of bounds (replan? not sure that's the intent. clear costmaps or rotate? not going to help). Fail navigation? actually that might make sense to trigger a total task failure since a core condition is breached. Also would make a cool BT XML demo to show that since I don't think we have any that do that yet!

I agree that failing the navigation task makes sense. A recovery that tries to pull the robot back in bounds might also be a good idea, but that needs some brainstorming. We can revisit the idea once we start working on #2599

Maybe worth ~10 minutes to think about some ideas. If there's not something obvious / generic, I think failing navigation is a good enough demo and be in line with what I think some users would want (a loud notification that this constraint is breached to record, recover from manually, and restart). I don't know if BT.CPP has a "throw exception" BT node / capability or we'd have to:

Create an Action node version of this condition node that validates bounds or throws/fails. Maybe FAILURE is enough with the BT design.

Create an ExceptionThrow Action BT node that we can use the conditional in concert with (and might actually have pretty good general purpose utility - have the input port be the exception string to throw)

Else, another option is that we bake this into the controller server with a new error code / exception for the bounds breaching for that to be propagated to the NavigateToPose / NavigateThroughPoses caller. The thresholded limits left/right would then ideally need to be on a per-path basis, but we could start with parameterized limits as well. Those would need to be propagated from the behavior tree anyway, so maybe handling it in the BT is more flexible. That does beg though if we need to add this limit to the NavigateToPose / NavigateThroughPoses actions

Maybe this is a big enough topic to discuss in the main ticket thread again

I think the closest concept in BTCPP for implementing an emergency stop is using halt/halttree. I like the idea of creating an ExceptionThrow Action BT Node, but I am not entirely sure whether that really fits the BTCPP design philosophy, I will need to think about that again.

I think more commonly, the pattern is to place the node at the top level and have it return failure + error code when it is not within the bound.

mini-1235 · 2025-12-09T10:48:06Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+    return BT::NodeStatus::FAILURE;
+  }
+
+  if (current_error > 0.0) {  // Positive = left side


I don't think we need to store the variable current_error / last_error here, instead we can have a variable that checks if this is within path tracking bounds. In every tick, we only need to check this variable

mini-1235 · 2025-12-09T10:50:33Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+
+  callback_group_executor_.spin_all(bt_loop_duration_);
+
+  if (!getInput("max_error_left", max_error_left_)) {


For consistency with other nodes, I don't think the check here is needed
Or move it to initialize

mini-1235 · 2025-12-09T10:51:08Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+    return BT::NodeStatus::FAILURE;
+  }
+
+  if (max_error_left_ < 0.0) {


This should be moved to initialize, I think

mini-1235 · 2025-12-09T10:51:41Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+    "tracking_feedback",
+    std::bind(&IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsCondition::trackingFeedbackCallback, this,
+      std::placeholders::_1),
+    rclcpp::SystemDefaultsQoS(),


We don't use rclcpp::SystemDefaultsQoS, please check other nodes

mini-1235 · 2025-12-10T09:59:19Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+  bt_loop_duration_ =
+    config().blackboard->template get<std::chrono::milliseconds>("bt_loop_duration");
+
+  RCLCPP_INFO(logger_, "Initialized IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsCondition BT node");


Remove the log please

mini-1235 · 2025-12-10T09:59:45Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+  }
+}
+
+void IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsCondition::initialize()


Can we move this before the subscription callback

mini-1235 · 2025-12-10T10:07:31Z

...ee/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp

+  rclcpp::executors::SingleThreadedExecutor callback_group_executor_;
+  nav2::Subscription<nav2_msgs::msg::TrackingFeedback>::SharedPtr tracking_feedback_sub_;
+  bool is_within_bounds_{false};
+  double max_error_right_{1.5};


I guess we should remove the default value here

mini-1235 · 2025-12-10T10:13:27Z

Thanks for fixing this, this looks much better IMO. I have one last question before I ask Steve for a final review:

I saw this tree in the XML demo and also in the migration guide:

<RateController hz="3.0">
      <Fallback name="PathTrackingRecoveryPlanner">
        <IsWithinPathTrackingBounds max_error_left="2.0" max_error_right="2.0" />
        <Fallback name="TieredReplanning">
          <ComputePathToPose goal="{goal}" path="{path}" planner_id="{selected_planner}" error_code_id="{compute_path_error_code}" error_msg="{compute_path_error_msg}"/>
          <Sequence>
            <ClearEntireCostmap name="ClearGlobalCostmap-Tier2" service_name="global_costmap/clear_entirely_global_costmap"/>
            <RetryUntilSuccessful num_attempts="1">
              <ComputePathToPose goal="{goal}" path="{path}" planner_id="{selected_planner}" error_code_id="{compute_path_error_code}" error_msg="{compute_path_error_msg}"/>
            </RetryUntilSuccessful>
          </Sequence>
        </Fallback>
      </Fallback>
    </RateController>

Could you explain this a bit? I am not sure I understand the idea behind it.

silanus23 · 2025-12-11T15:27:38Z

@mini-1235 Sorry for late response. Reading above conversations I think I misunderstood concept a bit. I was trying to create a beh. tree that controls robot at 3 Hz. and replans if out bounds. As I understand this requires some other work too I will delete it in the next commit (as soon as I get to chance) and try to implement it with another PR. What is your advice on this?

mini-1235 · 2025-12-12T10:00:45Z

I don't have a strong preference on whether the demo XML should be added in this PR or a follow-up one, so I will leave that decision to @SteveMacenski. But I would like to request including a minimal example in the migration guide so users know how to use this new node :)

SteveMacenski · 2025-12-12T19:54:52Z

For now, a demo could be using the condition node to log the event if out of bounds. Maybe publish out a topic indicating the event.

mini-1235 · 2025-12-16T11:03:58Z

@silanus23, we discussed this today. In short, we would like the demo to explicitly show a navigation failure when the robot goes out of bounds. It can be a very basic example, similar to other demos in that directory.

Could you please revisit #5602 (comment) and revise the demo accordingly?

mini-1235 · 2025-12-16T17:43:23Z

@silanus23, could you please show/explain how the navigation fails when the robot goes out of bounds? A short video would be especially helpful!

silanus23 · 2025-12-16T18:28:22Z

@mini-1235 I will handle the test problem and send a video where robot stops moving with a log. In addition maybe an extra explanation in docs can help.

mini-1235 · 2025-12-17T09:38:39Z

@mini-1235 I will handle the test problem and send a video where robot stops moving with a log. In addition maybe an extra explanation in docs can help.

Sounds good, thanks!

mini-1235 · 2025-12-26T11:54:20Z

nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/condition/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.cpp

+  }
+}
+
+void IsWithinPathTrackingBoundsCondition::trackingFeedbackCallback(


Per #5804, this should be updated to ConstSharedPtr

mini-1235 · 2026-01-28T18:28:36Z

In #5894, I actually added heading_tracking_error in addition to position_tracking_error. I think this could also be included in this PR, as it can be useful especially in cases where the robot never reverse

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

…n/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: silanus <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: silanus <berkantali23@outlook.com>

…n/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: silanus <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

mini-1235 · 2026-02-24T12:51:21Z

Hey @silanus23, I will take over this PR + docs PR and add you as a co-author so we can move things forward more quickly

silanus23 · 2026-02-24T13:00:00Z

@mini-1235 OK I have pushed my last local changes to the branch. Can move forward from there.

SteveMacenski reviewed Oct 13, 2025

View reviewed changes

silanus23 force-pushed the path-trackin-conditon-node branch from 61389fd to 3ea85d8 Compare October 24, 2025 10:11

SteveMacenski reviewed Nov 27, 2025

View reviewed changes

SteveMacenski mentioned this pull request Nov 27, 2025

Constrain distance from robot to path: helper function, Controller feedback, BT condition node, DWB/MPPI Controller Critics, Possible Costmap Layer Constraint for other controllers #5037

Open

10 tasks

SteveMacenski requested a review from mini-1235 December 4, 2025 18:25

silanus23 marked this pull request as ready for review December 5, 2025 12:08

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings December 5, 2025 12:08

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of silanus23 December 5, 2025 12:09 View session

Copilot finished reviewing on behalf of silanus23 December 5, 2025 12:13

Copilot AI reviewed Dec 5, 2025

View reviewed changes

silanus23 force-pushed the path-trackin-conditon-node branch from 4972a27 to 361035a Compare December 5, 2025 13:22

silanus23 requested a review from SteveMacenski December 5, 2025 16:58

SteveMacenski removed their request for review December 5, 2025 18:29

silanus23 mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2025

added is within path tracking bounds condition ros-navigation/docs.nav2.org#815

Closed

mini-1235 requested changes Dec 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

silanus23 requested a review from mini-1235 December 9, 2025 18:17

mini-1235 reviewed Dec 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

mini-1235 reviewed Dec 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

adivardi mentioned this pull request Jan 14, 2026

Add tracking feedback in FollowPath output port #5854

Merged

8 tasks

silanus23 and others added 19 commits January 29, 2026 10:33

header added

ceacf91

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

source file addition

c859e09

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

test file added

fdcd266

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Last additions

9d67366

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Styling changes

d5d9674

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Adding left, right side errors

6f25c83

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

minor changes

795933b

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

reviews

9ac86cd

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

adding b. tree

a520931

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Update nav2_behavior_tree/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/conditio…

2da2387

…n/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: silanus <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Update nav2_behavior_tree/nav2_tree_nodes.xml

7ad95ad

Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: silanus <berkantali23@outlook.com>

Update nav2_behavior_tree/include/nav2_behavior_tree/plugins/conditio…

ac95061

…n/is_within_path_tracking_bounds_condition.hpp Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: silanus <berkantali23@outlook.com>

copilot reviews

7c7828b

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

simplfication

e026c93

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

minor changes and navigate_with_bounds_check addition

d710208

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

typo

ac785ff

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

unnecessary default value

1de2e92

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

making demo fail on out of bounds

f57c082

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

making sharedptr const

2f51af5

Signed-off-by: silanus23 <berkantali23@outlook.com>

silanus23 force-pushed the path-trackin-conditon-node branch from c568266 to 2f51af5 Compare January 30, 2026 14:56

mini-1235 closed this Feb 24, 2026


		callback_group_executor_.spin_all(bt_loop_duration_);

		if (!getInput("max_error_left", max_error_left_)) {

Conversation

silanus23 commented Oct 13, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Basic Info

Description of contribution in a few bullet points

Description of documentation updates required from your changes

Description of how this change was tested

Future work that may be required in bullet points

Note:

For Maintainers:

Uh oh!

mergify bot commented Oct 13, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Oct 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

SteveMacenski left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

silanus23 commented Dec 4, 2025

Uh oh!

SteveMacenski commented Dec 4, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Dec 5, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mergify bot commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

mini-1235 commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

mini-1235 commented Dec 8, 2025

Uh oh!

mini-1235 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SteveMacenski Dec 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

silanus23 commented Oct 13, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Oct 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

SteveMacenski left a comment •

edited

Loading

SteveMacenski Dec 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mini-1235 Dec 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

silanus23 commented Dec 16, 2025 •

edited

Loading