feat(tier4_autoware_utils): add published time debug class into utils

[brkay54]

Description

Part of:

• Make it possible to detect publishing times of the messages in the pipelines #6255

Required for:

• feat: add published_time publisher debug to packages #6490

Depends on:

• feat(autoware.repos): add autoware_internal_msgs repository autoware#4212
• feat(autoware_internal_msgs): add PublishedTime debug info message autoware_internal_msgs#1

This interface would be enabled only if the use_published_time = true.

Tests performed

Tested on PSim and e2e_simulator, worked well.

Effects on system behavior

Not applicable.

Pre-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below when creating the PR.

• I've confirmed the contribution guidelines.
• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.

In-review checklist for the PR reviewers

The PR reviewers must check the checkboxes below before approval.

• The PR follows the pull request guidelines.

Post-review checklist for the PR author

The PR author must check the checkboxes below before merging.

• There are no open discussions or they are tracked via tickets.

After all checkboxes are checked, anyone who has write access can merge the PR.

[xmfcx]

Could you move struct GidCompare to the class, as a private member, closer to its usage?

Reasons:

1. Encapsulation is improved by moving GidCompare inside PublishedTimePublisher, making it clear that this comparison logic is specific to the class's internal workings.
2. Cohesion is enhanced by keeping related functionalities together, making the class more self-contained and understandable.

Example:

private:
  rclcpp::Node * node_;
  std::string end_name_;
  rclcpp::QoS qos_;

  struct GidCompare
  {
    bool operator()(const rmw_gid_t & lhs, const rmw_gid_t & rhs) const
    {
      return std::memcmp(lhs.data, rhs.data, RMW_GID_STORAGE_SIZE) < 0;
    }
  };

  std::map<rmw_gid_t, rclcpp::Publisher<PublishedTime>::SharedPtr, GidCompare> publishers_;

  void ensure_publisher_exists(const rmw_gid_t & gid_key, const std::string & topic_name);

[xmfcx]

Placing the using directive for PublishedTime outside the class at the namespace level makes it globally accessible within the namespace, which could lead to naming conflicts with other entities. This broader scope unnecessarily exposes the alias, potentially complicating the codebase and affecting readability for developers not directly working with the PublishedTimePublisher class.

Moving the using directive for PublishedTime inside the PublishedTimePublisher class confines its scope to where it is actually used, enhancing code readability and maintainability. This approach avoids potential naming conflicts and makes the class definition more self-contained and easier to understand.

private:
  rclcpp::Node * node_;
  std::string end_name_;
  rclcpp::QoS qos_;

  using PublishedTime = autoware_internal_msgs::msg::PublishedTime;

[brkay54]

@xmfcx Thank you for the detailed review. 🙏🏼

[xmfcx]

thanks!

[xmfcx]

https://github.com/autowarefoundation/autoware.universe/actions/runs/8245809015/job/22550518856?pr=6440#step:7:99
fails

[xmfcx]

a1a595c should fix it.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 14.78%. Comparing base (b7fdccc) to head (a1a595c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6440      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   14.79%   14.78%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files        1915     1915              
  Lines      132352   132547     +195     
  Branches    39333    39496     +163     
==========================================
+ Hits        19580    19593      +13     
- Misses      90939    91086     +147     
- Partials    21833    21868      +35     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
differential	16.78% <ø> (?)
total	14.79% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from b7fdccc

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[brkay54]

@soblin @TakaHoribe @takayuki5168 Hi, we need a code owner approvement. Could you check the PR?

[takayuki5168]

@brkay54
Thank you for the contribution. Can you create a unit test for the feature? Generally, we create a test for functions in the tier4_autoware_utils package.

[xmfcx]

@brkay54 could you open up a new PR for the tests of the code added here? I will merge it, it is blocking some other PRs.