Subsurface planner

[Stefan Fuchs]

Hello Rick,

Am 20.10.2017 um 04:04 schrieb Rick Walsh:
>
>
>     Based on a little bit of testing I'm doing while I can't do my
>     actual work, the good news appears to be:
>     - the issue only relates to the displayed ceiling in the planner,
>     not to the dive plan itself.
>     - The tests still pass.
>     - once the plan is saved, the dive profile is displayed with a
>     reasonable ceiling, consistent with the dive plan
>
>     [...]
>     The following change to core/profile.c:1015 might be a fix based
>     on the second option, but I don't have a build environment to test.
>     Change:
>                     /* If using VPM-B outside the planner, take
>     first_ceiling_pressure as the deepest ceiling */
>                     if (decoMode() == VPMB) {
>                         if  (current_ceiling > first_ceiling) {
>                                 time_deep_ceiling = t1;
>                                
>                                
>     To:
>                     /* If using VPM-B outside the planner, take
>     first_ceiling_pressure as the deepest ceiling */
>                     if (decoMode() == VPMB) {
>                         if  (current_ceiling >= first_ceiling ||
>     entry->depth >= entry[-1].depth) {
>                                 time_deep_ceiling = t1;
>
> [...]
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
> 				
>
>
> Try:
>                 /* If using VPM-B outside the planner, take
> first_ceiling_pressure as the deepest ceiling */
>                 if (decoMode() == VPMB) {
>                     if  (current_ceiling >= first_ceiling ||
> (time_deep_ceiling = t0 && entry->depth >= entry[-1].depth)) {
>                             time_deep_ceiling = t1;
>
>  
>
>     Could someone with a build environment please test?
>
>
Tested both variants but unfortunately none of both gave a satisfying
result.
In both cases the displayed ceiling neither does fit some of my real
dives nor does fit together with the planner waypoints any longer. Both
variants show similar results, so I attach screenshots from the first
variant only.
For the real dive shown below this is way to much ceiling.






-- 

Stefan Fuchs
E-Mail: sfuchs at gmx.de <mailto:sfuchs at gmx.de>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20171020/1a1c9aeb/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: igeoojanindobjjd.png
Type: image/png
Size: 174894 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20171020/1a1c9aeb/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pkeanocacdbjboan.png
Type: image/png
Size: 219802 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/pipermail/subsurface/attachments/20171020/1a1c9aeb/attachment-0003.png>