[PATCH] Add average depth from OSTC/OSTC3 logbook

[Jef Driesen]

On 2015-01-21 09:59, Anton Lundin wrote:
> On 21 January, 2015 - Jef Driesen wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-01-21 08:38, Anton Lundin wrote:
>> > static const hw_ostc_layout_t hw_ostc_layout_ostc = {
>> > 	3,  /* datetime */
>> > 	8,  /* maxdepth */
>> >+	45, /* avgdepth */
>> > 	10, /* divetime */
>> > 	15, /* atmospheric */
>> > 	43, /* salinity */
>> >@@ -121,6 +123,7 @@ static const hw_ostc_layout_t hw_ostc_layout_ostc = {
>> > static const hw_ostc_layout_t hw_ostc_layout_frog = {
>> > 	9,  /* datetime */
>> > 	14, /* maxdepth */
>> >+	UNSUPPORTED, /* avgdepth */
>> > 	16, /* divetime */
>> > 	21, /* atmospheric */
>> > 	43, /* salinity */
>> 
>> This fails to compile because UNSUPPORTED isn't defined. According to 
>> the
>> frog documentation the average depth is stored at offset 45, just like 
>> the
>> ostc.
>> 
> 
> Ah, thats because the UNSUPPORTED flag only exists in the subsurface
> branches, and if its at offset 45 it can easily be fixed.
> 
> Btw. From where have you gotten any frog documentation? Have you gotten
> it straight from HW? As far as i know, none have bin published, at 
> least
> not on bitbucket where i've found the OSTC{2,3} documentation.

Yes, I got the documentation from HW. As far as I know it has never been 
published.

>> PS: The average depth field is not implemented for any backend. I 
>> added the
>> field because I thought it made sense at that time. But most 
>> applications
>> seem to prefer to calculate avg depth from the profile (which has the
>> advantage of being able to take into account preferences like ignore 
>> shallow
>> samples, etc), so I just never bothered to implement this.
> 
> Yea, i saw the field when i dug around in the OSTC{2,3} documentation 
> to
> try to figure out other things, so i thought id implement it.
> 
> When i check, the eonsteel backed actually implements it.
> 
> Maybe it should raise some deprecation warning in dc_parser_get_field?

Well, I'm not really sure whether we should deprecate it or not. It 
might still be useful for someone. I just mentioned this in case you 
were wondering why it's not implemented in any other backend (with the 
exception of the eonsteel) :-)

Jef