Author Topic: Radar graph for short times is wrong (at least some of the time)  (Read 1942 times)

Offline AJMSmith

  • Regular
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: 0
Radar graph for short times is wrong (at least some of the time)
« on: November 13, 2008, 12:50:47 AM »
It appears that the time axis of the radar graph is miscalculated ... as I write this the time axis shows 0, 1.2 and 2.5 days as the only marked values ... yet the catchup is not due for 3.7 days to 1 dp (in days) ... me thinks you are using a truncation function somewhere a round function should be used and are truncating 2.99 (or something) to 2 when you should be using 3 ... or someting like that ...

A
Allan Smith
(Northwood, Middlesex, England)

Offline Kakao

  • Administrator
  • Regular
  • *****
  • Posts: 198
  • Karma: 1
    • Facebook
Re: Radar graph for short times is wrong (at least some of the time)
« Reply #1 on: November 13, 2008, 01:49:17 AM »
Could you point to the page?
Every criticism or suggestion from the user is a gift. Even if i disagree or don't answer. Obviously if there is real intellectual work on producing it the better.

Offline AJMSmith

  • Regular
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Karma: 0
Re: Radar graph for short times is wrong (at least some of the time)
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2008, 11:49:50 AM »
I noticed it on ... http://kakaostats.com/tr.php?t=35947 ... but it does not seem to be consistant ... but it is certainly associated with graphs where there is overtakes due within 9 days or so and no others due within 100 days ... there also might be a need for the longest sub 9 day overtake period to be a whole number of days plus an amount over 12 hours rather than under 12 hours ... I say this because the error seems to have gone this morning ... but was there last night ...

A
Allan Smith
(Northwood, Middlesex, England)

Offline Kakao

  • Administrator
  • Regular
  • *****
  • Posts: 198
  • Karma: 1
    • Facebook
Re: Radar graph for short times is wrong (at least some of the time)
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2008, 02:09:50 PM »
That piece of code is quite old and since the problem is intermittent it will probably be easier to rewrite it.

I saw the problem in the early days of the site then i patched it and never saw it again. I think that in instead of fixing it i just made the bug rare.
Every criticism or suggestion from the user is a gift. Even if i disagree or don't answer. Obviously if there is real intellectual work on producing it the better.