-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 21
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
Migrate away from urdf_parser_py? #36
Comments
Exposing the iDynTree (or Pinocchio) parser? Is it possible? |
The iDynTree parser is already exposed, it has the cons listed in the table but the pro that we obtain a rapresentation that is for sure 100% compatible with iDynTree, also w.r.t. to serialization, reduced joitns and similar aspects. However, I am afraid it is a bit more difficult to use than pure python libraries. |
I was with @CarlottaSartore and she told me that another possible parser could be urchin. What's your opinion? |
urchin is based a rebranded version of urdfpy, forked in a repo so that we can do releases (see mmatl/urdfpy#31). Basically it is like urdfpy, but with the advantage that we can publish fixes for it on both PyPI and conda-forge. If you like it, feel free to use it. |
icub-tech-iit/ergocub-gazebo-simulations#49 we were affected by a urdf_parser_py bug (tracked in ros/urdf_parser_py#82). |
Reviving this issue! I don't know if, parser-wise, the situation has changed since some months ago. |
Maybe https://github.com/ami-iit/rod can be an option |
If you are looking for something that can be installed via |
Yep this is the trade-off of Nowadays, the Note that |
I am afraid there is no clear winner here as of November 2024. This is quick assessment:
In a nutshell, as long as you install dependencies via conda-forge, everything is fine, while if the concern is being able to install via pypi e have a python code to look into it, the winner may be urchin, but I am not sure if this is enough to justify the effort to migrate. @diegoferigo @flferretti @Giulero feel free to suggest changes on the Pro/Cons assessment. |
Ah, there is also https://github.com/clemense/yourdfpy, but I never used it (and I am biased on avoiding to add yet another URDF parser used in the lab). Also, Hugging Face robotics people may soon be releasing a fork of urdf_parser_py, according to dora-rs/dora#704 . |
However, the parser is already in conda-forge thanks to rerun and prefix people, so it is not so back. I think it make sense to add it to the table, at least. |
Thanks @traversaro for the analysis! At this point, it seems the best options are likely
So, for now, it looks like |
Thanks @Giulero, I updated the table by adding the useful features in idyntree as a pro. |
I decided to take the bull by the horns: ros/urdf_parser_py#85 (comment), hopefully we will eventually have an updated |
urdf_parser_py
is a bit of a problematic dependency:At the moment, I was kind of deadlocked w.r.t. to this. Anyhow, yesterday @GiulioRomualdi suggested that we could migrate from urdf_parser_py to another library to load the the URDF. At beginning I was not entusiastic about the idea, but if that would be feasible it would be indeed great. In the following I would list a few alternatives:
yourdfpy
urdfpy
Initially I opened this issue noting that yourdfpy could be a well-mantained pure python library that it could make sense to use, but apparently it has mantainance problem as well, so I am deadlocked again. However, it is a bit too late as I already wrote the issue, so let's open the issue, perhaps it may be useful in the future.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: