> On Feb 1, 2017, at 1:59 PM, Robert Helling <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Dirk,
>
>> On 31 Jan 2017, at 11:52, Robert Helling <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>> I have no idea why we fail in that case. Related seems commit
>>
>> commit 956d1897345c727af23089cd98cef34597aed9ff
>> Author: Dirk Hohndel <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>> Date: Sun Dec 6 09:40:21 2015 -0800
>>
>> Only warn about different number of tanks and gases if there are tanks
>>
>> Some backends support giving tank data for some, but not all models that
>> they support (and simply report no tanks for those models that don't
>> support this). The Suunto Vyper is one of the dive computers where this
>> happens and without this change we report angry red warnings after a
>> perfectly correct download.
>>
>> So this changes the logic to only show that error if there actually were
>> tanks reported.
>>
>> This (ntanks=1 and ngasmixes=0) is really a case where we should at most
>> warn. I don’t know how to handle the gas though: we only know the pressures
>> but not the mix. Should we pretend it’s air?
>>
>
> Dirk, could you please comment on how this should be fixed? Shall we make
> this a special case (Suunto) and pretend the diver has been breathing air?
We have a tank and no gas. I would have assumed that's bogus, but
apparently that's what we get. So yes, let's assume air and be done
with it (but still warn, saying something like "received tank information
but no gas mix data, assuming air")
> Do you have an opinion on merging the gas list when merging a real dive with
> a planned one (see other thread started by Willem)?
This is not something that I've ever used or expect to ever use, so
I really have no opinion nor an idea what would be reasonable
behavior.
/D
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
