On 03/11/2014 11:59, Paul Sargent wrote:
On 3 Nov 2014 08:35, Robert Helling <[email protected]> wrote:
On 03.11.2014, at 09:26, Willem Ferguson <[email protected]>
wrote:
You guys have the experience. Please advise?? Robert, your opinion?
IMHO having special, hardcoded meanings for 0 and 1 is bad and also for the
future having symbolic names is much better even if at the moment they always
have the values 0 and 1.
I would agree. If someone is planning a dive or entering gases manually then
fixed indices well be a total pain.
Paul
Paul,
Currently, when CCR data files are imported, cylinder 0 is used for
oxygen because that is probably the single least variable among
different CCR systems. Then cylinder 1 is used for the diluent gas
because all CCR systems require a diluent gas. When it comes to other
additional cylinders I agree that almost unlimited freedom should exist.
But as far as the cylinders are concerned that are monitored by the CCR
computer(s), cylinders 0 and 1 are dedicated because that is with what
one has to start off with. Does this bring about any specific
difficulty, even in using the planner? How would a Shearwater diver
think about these issues?
Now please do not deduce that I am trying to make a case for hard
coding. Not at all. I am trying to discover how other CCR divers think
that have a totally different frame of mind from what I am thinking
about, because this might bring me new insights. Please comment, will you?
Kind regards,
willem
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
