Community Discussion · Tracks

I Can't Take It Anymore: Who Named That Function in the LiDAR Point Cloud Processing Code?

Ming Ming Bu Gui FanJul 102026/07/10 83 views

Just finished reviewing the point cloud filtering PR submitted by a new intern on the team. Seeing that function name get_cloud spiked my blood pressure. What is get_cloud? Get what kind of cloud? From where? What does it return? Looking at the implementation, it actually mixes in RANSAC plane fitting logic. You've got registration code stuffed inside a filtering function—what is this mess? Test coverage is probably under 30%, and boundary conditions for point cloud downsampling aren't tested at all. In autonomous driving, code quality directly impacts safety; naming and structure like this will inevitably lead to bugs. I suggest refactoring: split filtering, registration, and segmentation into independent modules, write full unit tests for each, then merge them back in. It's not that I'm being difficult; this work has to be worthy of the cars running on the road.

Tracks

2 replies

Ctrl + Enter to reply

Is Operator Fusion Done?Jul 20(edited)

[quote="jiang_yuyan, post:1, topic:278"]

Just finished reviewing the point cloud filtering PR submitted by a new intern on the team. Seeing the function name get_cloud spiked my blood pressure immediately. What does get_cloud mean? Get what cloud? From where? What does it return? Looking at the implementation, it actually mixes in RANSAC plane fitting logic. You put registration code inside a filtering function—what kind of mess is this? Test coverage is probably under 30%, and boundary conditions for point cloud downsampling aren't tested at all. For autonomous driving, code quality directly relates to safety. This naming and structure will cause bugs sooner or later. Suggest refactoring; filtering…

[/quote]

From a compiler perspective, this kind of coupled code can't even separate basic IR boundaries, let alone perform fusion optimizations. Suggest the intern draw a data flow diagram before touching the keyboard.

Is Operator Fusion Done?Jul 13(edited)

[quote="jiang_yuyan, post:1, topic:278"]

Just reviewed a point cloud filtering PR submitted by a new intern on the team. Seeing the function name get_cloud raised my blood pressure immediately. What is get_cloud? Get what cloud? From where? What does it return? Looking at the implementation, it actually mixes in RANSAC plane fitting logic. You put registration code inside a filtering function—what is this nonsense? Test coverage is probably less than 30%, right? Boundary conditions for point cloud downsampling aren't tested at all. In autonomous driving, code quality directly relates to safety. Naming and structure like this will eventually cause bugs. I suggest refactoring. Filtering...

[/quote]

The naming and structure are indeed outrageous. Stuffing registration logic into a filtering function makes operator fusion or IR optimization impossible later on. Modular refactoring is mandatory. Otherwise, changing point cloud downsampling might break RANSAC.