[PATCH] Re: Beta Testing - Dive Planner
Dirk Hohndel
dirk at hohndel.org
Mon Sep 14 09:12:07 PDT 2015
On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 05:42:40PM +0200, Robert Helling wrote:
>
> On 14 Sep 2015, at 16:42, Dirk Hohndel <dirk at hohndel.org> wrote:
>
> Dirk,
>
> > Either way - the code below has me a bit unhappy as we start the loop with
> > sample pointing at the very first sample.
> >
> > So simply accessing sample[-1]? Probably not a good solution.
> >
> > Which begs the question, do we need this transition for the first step
> > (which starts at the surface)?
>
> it’s not that I had not worried about this problem. In fact, I did some testing and it seems the case i=0 that would access sample[-1] is dangerous. But in fact, that is always the surface sample of 0 duration. So it does not really do anything and I concluded this is save. But if you want, I can protect this with a if(i) in front. Or at least add a comment or a remark in the commit message.
>
> What do you think?
Accessing sample[-1] is not the right thing to do. So even if it may not
matter because of the way the calculation works out, we should not do
that. So I'd prefer if there was a conditional statement that prevented us
from accessing sample[-1].
/D
More information about the subsurface
mailing list