Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve mission phase checks #4

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 24, 2024
Merged

Improve mission phase checks #4

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 24, 2024

Conversation

dahlend
Copy link
Collaborator

@dahlend dahlend commented Apr 23, 2024

This makes it more explicit where scan ids are converted to mission phases. This is a bit fuzzy around reactivation year boundaries, but is FAR more accurate.

This has been tested by loading every single field of view through all phases through 2023 december, verifying that it returns the correct phase except near year boundaries where it may be off by a year, but still return "Reactivation_".

It is precisely correct for non-reactivation phases.

Copy link
Collaborator

@joemasiero joemasiero left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good as is. One thing that comes to mind is that this (and the old code) assumes the user only supplies valid scans. e.g. 20000a would return Reactivation_2014 despite being during hibernation. Do we care about users doing bad searches? Should we add something at line 250 along the lines of elif scan<44XXX: return none?

@dahlend
Copy link
Collaborator Author

dahlend commented Apr 24, 2024

I think we should leave it as is, there are so many edge cases where the user can put in invalid scan-ids. Attempting to enumerate them all would make this code even more complicated.

@dahlend dahlend merged commit 26d33ee into main Apr 24, 2024
1 check passed
@dahlend dahlend deleted the wise_checks2 branch April 24, 2024 16:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants