is option b actually something that some of this hardware will produce? On Sunday, November 6, 2016 at 12:16:00 PM UTC-6, mwall wrote: > > On Sunday, November 6, 2016 at 12:12:54 PM UTC-5, Jerome Helbert wrote: >> >> Matt, >> How would you prefer bugs be written up? Just posts here, or would it >> work better to create an issue in github? >> > > here is fine. if the solutions get complicated enough to reference the > code we can move the discussion to github. > > option a (current): report a delta of None when wraparound is detected. > this is guaranteed to miss one rain report whenever the counter wraps. > > option b (proposed): report a delta equal to the new counter value when > wraparound is detected. this can result in wild values for rain in the > database if there are spurious rain counter readings, i.e., when the > counter is less than the previous value but not actually a count since zero. > > i have implemented option b at commit 81765e5. we'll see what kind of > spurious readings we get with this combination of hardware... > > m >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weewx-user" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
