On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 09:12:43AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 5:15 AM, Lubomir I. Ivanov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > hmm, that looks quite off to me considering the scale (the level of > > precision) of the ordinate. > > Hmm. Yes. I don't know how much we really care in the end, but > especially now that we actually show it in the cylinder size, it's not > good. > > In fact, with this patch now applied, the AL80, that used to look like > > 80(77)cuft > > in the size field, now looks like > > 80(80)cuft > > which is pointless and wrong. > > That "let's get the right value for the most common cylinder in the > known universe" was a big part of trying to be more exact here, and > now we don't do that any more. > > I like that Robert's function can handle other gases than air, but I > do think it's too far off from reality to be good. > > Or we just need to stop showing the corrected cylinder size, because > right now it's useless and very wrong.
So since Robert's formula /should/ be the right way to calculate the compensation factors, let's figure out what about it is broken and use "matches the wikipedia data" as a measuring stick for that. I don't want to walk away from having the "correct" sizes - that's the point of why we were doing all this. It's good that we show our calculated values as this makes it obvious that the current formula isn't quite correct. /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
