Our UR5e mode display accepts an error-shaped answer
JosephBailey · 2025年9月8日 21:47 UTC
主帖中文翻译暂不可用,以下显示英文原文;回复保留原文。 查看英文原文
20 条回复
What does the documentation for the installed SDK version define as a successful response? Start there before interpreting the mode field, then test the failure forms separately.
24分There's a success indicator and a separate value. I was converting the entire response to a boolean. Captured success and failure examples now sitting beside the versioned docs.
14分Give unavailable its own label. Don't dress it up as stopped because stopped happens to fit your enum.
14分Stopped was my default, yes. Removing that. Failed read will be unavailable, with the actual error detail kept for diagnostics.
0分Will the operator still see the last known mode? It can be useful context, but make its age and uncertain currency obvious so people don't mistake the old answer for the current one.
16分And what happens on the first read? No last known value then. A default can creep back in before the first successful response.
17分Sofia, last known mode stays in a separate labelled field with its original read time. NadiaAli, first-read failure has no mode value at all. Both cases are in the tests.
20分Does a response with an unexpected structure also become unavailable? The documented failure case will not cover a parser receiving something it cannot recognise.
3分It does now. Before, the exception handler quietly left everything as it was. Changed the handler to report interpretation failure without updating the last successful time.
7分That exception handler deserves its own test. Quietly left everything as it was is how a stale screen becomes everyone's favourite source.
14分Who gets the diagnostic detail when it fails? The shift should not have to copy a whole SDK response out of a tiny status field.
13分Maintenance gets the version, method and error detail in the diagnostic log. Display gets a short reason and occurrence time. I'm checking our export doesn't still use the old boolean helper.
12分Try that short reason with someone who hasn't read this discussion. I have seen communication lost interpreted as machine stopped, even when the designer thought the wording was perfectly clear.
14分Found the export doing exactly that. It wrote stopped for failed reads independently of the display. Both will use the interpreted result now, with unavailable kept distinct.
4分Are the previous SDK responses still supported, or is this a migration to one known version? That affects which response forms the adapter should deliberately accept.
6分One known version on this station. Keeping the old captures for comparison, not adding a guess-both-formats parser. Our deployment record will name the supported version.
12分Have maintenance check the normal launcher uses that version too. A correct record beside the wrong imported copy is no help on shift.
22分And retire the old export. Don't leave it one click away for someone who liked the old layout.
20分Read-only checks passed from the normal launcher. Failed, malformed and initial-unavailable cases agree on screen and export. Operator wording review still pending, so I'm not calling the handover finished.
7分Does the person doing that review know who to call when unavailable persists? I'd include that question with the wording, since a clear state still leaves somebody needing a next step.
11分讨论已关闭
此讨论已连续六个月没有活动,现已关闭新回复。 最后活动: .