The sequence was a standard QSO. When I sent the 73 I logged the QSO immediately. He sent another RRR and the autosequence chose TX 3 to respond. I had not moved to another QSO...was still on him.It appears to be caused by the reset of m_QSOProgress here: bool b=(m_mode=="FT8") and ui->cbAutoSeq->isChecked(); if(is_73 and (m_config.disable_TX_on_73() or b)) { if(m_nextCall!="") { useNextCall(); } else { auto_tx_mode (false); if(b) { m_ntx=6; ui->txrb6->setChecked(true); m_QSOProgress = CALLING; } } }
Here's the patch that relaxes the sequencing and allows clicking such late messages and pick the correct response.This was against the 1.9 version -- the first section allow double-click and old QSO when they repeat after you've moved to another QSO. The 2nd relaxes the sequencing requirement and appears to work just fine...been running it for weeks. @@ -4215,11 +4217,12 @@ { if (message_words.size () > 3 // enough fields for a normal message && (message_words.at (1).contains (m_baseCall) || "DE" == message_words.at (1)) - && message_words.at (2).contains (qso_partner_base_call) + //&& message_words.at (2).contains (qso_partner_base_call) && !message_words.at (3).contains (grid_regexp)) // but no grid on end of msg { QString r=message_words.at (3); - if(m_QSOProgress >= ROGER_REPORT && (r=="RRR" || r.toInt()==73 || "RR73" == r)) { + //if(m_QSOProgress >= ROGER_REPORT && (r=="RRR" || r.toInt()==73 || "RR73" == r)) { + if(r=="RRR" || r.toInt()==73 || "RR73" == r) { if(ui->tabWidget->currentIndex()==1) { gen_msg = 5; if (ui->rbGenMsg->isChecked ()) m_ntx=7; On Thursday, October 18, 2018, 8:16:46 AM CDT, Joe Taylor <j...@princeton.edu> wrote: Mike -- On 10/17/2018 5:22 PM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote: > Was working a QSO...logged him during the 73 being sent from me. > He came back with another RRR and the autosequence then sent R+00 > instead of 73. Had to turn off autoseq to finish the QSO. > > This is another example of why we need to relax the sequencing with the > patch I provided before. Unfortunately, I can't make sense of your message. Please explain exactly what sequence of messages took place, and what is the "patch you provided before". When? Against what source code? -- Joe, K1JT _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel