Use double/int_least64_t for coordinates to support GPS RTK #83
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
GPS RTK modules like Unicore UM9xx have a higher precision for latitude and longitude.
|
@rovo89 I think this would be very helpful, I got the same issue with precision when working with ZED-F9P module |
Author
|
From technical point of view I think it's fine, so you can just use my fork. Of course I'd prefer to get this merged, and I'd adjust the README for that, but as long as there is no interest by the maintainers, I don't want to spend the time. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The README mentions that five decimal digits can be parsed for coordinates. However, GPS RTK modules are built for even higher precision and therefore send eight decimal digits (tested with a UM980 module by Witmotion). This precision gets lost when using
float/int_float32_t. Therefore, this PR introducesminmea_doublewithint_least64_tvalue and scale and uses them for coordinates. The easier way would be adjustingminmea_float, but I didn't want to add overhead to fields that don't need such precision and it would be strange to have a type with that name handled like adouble.Tests are adjusted, README not yet. I can do that if you show interest to actually merge this.