feat: migrate autoware_localization_util from universe to core

[liuXinGangChina]

Description

Port autoware_localization_util from Autoware.Universe to Core.

Related links

Parent Issue:

• Link Port 'autoware_localization_util' from Autoware Universe to Autoware Core #148
• this pr should be merged with this pr feat(autoware_localization_util): porting from universe to core, autoware_localization_util, remove from universe repo autoware.universe#9888

How was this PR tested?

Notes for reviewers

None.

Interface changes

None.

Effects on system behavior

None.

[github-actions]

Thank you for contributing to the Autoware project!

🚧 If your pull request is in progress, switch it to draft mode.

Please ensure:

• You've checked our contribution guidelines.
• Your PR follows our pull request guidelines.
• All required CI checks pass before marking the PR ready for review.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.57682% with 124 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 70.74%. Comparing base (4cb18f5) to head (4349e56).
Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ation/autoware_localization_util/src/util_func.cpp	61.26%	40 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
...oware_localization_util/src/covariance_ellipse.cpp	0.00%	37 Missing ⚠️
...toware_localization_util/src/smart_pose_buffer.cpp	60.93%	17 Missing and 8 partials ⚠️
..._localization_util/test/test_smart_pose_buffer.cpp	78.84%	0 Missing and 11 partials ⚠️
...tion_util/src/tree_structured_parzen_estimator.cpp	92.68%	2 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
...lization_util/tree_structured_parzen_estimator.hpp	0.00%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...ation/autoware_localization_util/test/test_tpe.cpp	95.83%	0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #150      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   78.75%   70.74%   -8.02%     
==========================================
  Files          11       18       +7     
  Lines         193      564     +371     
  Branches       73      201     +128     
==========================================
+ Hits          152      399     +247     
- Misses         11      107      +96     
- Partials       30       58      +28     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
differential	66.57% <66.57%> (?)
total	78.75% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from d7e2b26

*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.

[liuXinGangChina]

So far， there is only one required item of ci failed （cpp-check-differicial），below is the report

it looks no node use these functions， but i believe they will be used in the future because there are more nodes to be migrate into core

In conclusion， I think we can merge this pr for now。

What’s your idea，shintaro san @SakodaShintaro ？

Have a nice day！

[SakodaShintaro]

Thank you for the correction.

Yes, those functions are used in autoware.universe.

@veqcc @mitsudome-r

There seem to be some errors when implementing functions that are only used in autoware.universe.

Is there a policy on for how to deal with these?

I feel that it is questionable whether such functions and packages should be migrated to autoware.core.

[veqcc]

@SakodaShintaro
Hi, I'll comment from the perspective of cppcheck settings.

Currently, the cppcheck-differential workflow in autoware.universe IGNORES unusedFunction.
The configuration file can be found here:
https://github.com/autowarefoundation/autoware.universe/blob/main/.cppcheck_suppressions

This is because the differential checks cannot avoid false-positives of unusedFunction when the caller and callee exist in separate packages.

It seems that the cppcheck configuration in autoware.core do not ignore unusedFunction even in the differential checks.
I recommend to suppress unusedFunction in differential checks 👍

[youtalk]

Since it’s a porting task, I’m keeping the review to a minimum.
However I was concerned about the lack of consistency, as the existing package names have a _utils suffix, whereas this one uses _util.

[SakodaShintaro]

Another pull request in autoware.universe to remove autoware_localization_util is needed.

Could you create the PR and link to it in the description?

[liuXinGangChina]

Another pull request in autoware.universe to remove autoware_localization_util is needed.

Could you create the PR and link to it in the description?

Shintaro san

sure ，i will create a pr under universe repo

have a nice day！

心刚

[youtalk]

Thank you for the revision. LGTM

[liuXinGangChina]

Another pull request in autoware.universe to remove autoware_localization_util is needed.

Could you create the PR and link to it in the description?

Shintaro san

the pr to remove original package under universe repo is autowarefoundation/autoware.universe#9888

Best regards

心刚