TestActionResult vs TestResult in Exercise 5.13

[ousam.share]

1. I don’t understand why we can bypass TestActionResult and TestActionFeedback as in the solution of Ex 5.13. If I check TestAction.msg, the feedback and result should be TestActionResult and TestActionFeedback. Though TestActionResult contains TestResult, it also contains an addional header also. Why we can get away using TestResult and TestFeedback directly (instead of TestActionResult and TestActionFeedback)?

2. And what is the role of Test.action? I don’t see it is called and used anywhere in the code. The same for Fibonacci.action as well. It doesn’t seem to be used anywhere in the example just before the exercise.

[bayodesegun]

Hi @ousam.share,

@ousam.share

I don’t understand why we can bypass TestActionResult and TestActionFeedback as in the solution of Ex 5.13. If I check TestAction.msg, the feedback and result should be TestActionResult and TestActionFeedback. Though TestActionResult contains TestResult, it also contains an addional header also. Why we can get away using TestResult and TestFeedback directly (instead of TestActionResult and TestActionFeedback)?

The message classes with the word Action are used when working from the terminals while the ones without it are used in the code. This is a ROS convention, and it’s mentioned somewhere in the notebook.

@ousam.share

And what is the role of Test.action? I don’t see it is called and used anywhere in the code. The same for Fibonacci.action as well. It doesn’t seem to be used anywhere in the example just before the exercise.

The .action files defines the Action. The Action message classes are generated from this file.