diff options
author | Tomaz Canabrava <tomaz.canabrava@intel.com> | 2015-09-02 20:52:34 -0300 |
---|---|---|
committer | Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org> | 2015-10-30 10:36:48 -0700 |
commit | 4c0156e3d51b389db8eccc3fa3da4b8f248f9b13 (patch) | |
tree | 966868d29150fdba13a5a56fb4305bc432ec7a72 /subsurface-core/device.c | |
parent | a0798214231c652ac6142228f5ddfc4b65c921f8 (diff) | |
download | subsurface-4c0156e3d51b389db8eccc3fa3da4b8f248f9b13.tar.gz |
Move all core-functionality to subsurface-core
And adapt a new CMakeLists.txt file for it. On the way I've also
found out that we where double-compilling a few files. I've also
set the subsurface-core as a include_path but that was just to
reduce the noise on this commit, since I plan to remove it from
the include path to make it obligatory to specify something like
include "subsurface-core/dive.h"
for the header files. Since the app is growing quite a bit we ended
up having a few different files with almost same name that did
similar things, I want to kill that (for instance Dive.h, dive.h,
PrintDive.h and such).
Signed-off-by: Tomaz Canabrava <tomaz.canabrava@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Dirk Hohndel <dirk@hohndel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'subsurface-core/device.c')
-rw-r--r-- | subsurface-core/device.c | 180 |
1 files changed, 180 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/subsurface-core/device.c b/subsurface-core/device.c new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c952c84be --- /dev/null +++ b/subsurface-core/device.c @@ -0,0 +1,180 @@ +#include <string.h> +#include "dive.h" +#include "device.h" + +/* + * Good fake dive profiles are hard. + * + * "depthtime" is the integral of the dive depth over + * time ("area" of the dive profile). We want that + * area to match the average depth (avg_d*max_t). + * + * To do that, we generate a 6-point profile: + * + * (0, 0) + * (t1, max_d) + * (t2, max_d) + * (t3, d) + * (t4, d) + * (max_t, 0) + * + * with the same ascent/descent rates between the + * different depths. + * + * NOTE: avg_d, max_d and max_t are given constants. + * The rest we can/should play around with to get a + * good-looking profile. + * + * That six-point profile gives a total area of: + * + * (max_d*max_t) - (max_d*t1) - (max_d-d)*(t4-t3) + * + * And the "same ascent/descent rates" requirement + * gives us (time per depth must be same): + * + * t1 / max_d = (t3-t2) / (max_d-d) + * t1 / max_d = (max_t-t4) / d + * + * We also obviously require: + * + * 0 <= t1 <= t2 <= t3 <= t4 <= max_t + * + * Let us call 'd_frac = d / max_d', and we get: + * + * Total area must match average depth-time: + * + * (max_d*max_t) - (max_d*t1) - (max_d-d)*(t4-t3) = avg_d*max_t + * max_d*(max_t-t1-(1-d_frac)*(t4-t3)) = avg_d*max_t + * max_t-t1-(1-d_frac)*(t4-t3) = avg_d*max_t/max_d + * t1+(1-d_frac)*(t4-t3) = max_t*(1-avg_d/max_d) + * + * and descent slope must match ascent slopes: + * + * t1 / max_d = (t3-t2) / (max_d*(1-d_frac)) + * t1 = (t3-t2)/(1-d_frac) + * + * and + * + * t1 / max_d = (max_t-t4) / (max_d*d_frac) + * t1 = (max_t-t4)/d_frac + * + * In general, we have more free variables than we have constraints, + * but we can aim for certain basics, like a good ascent slope. + */ +static int fill_samples(struct sample *s, int max_d, int avg_d, int max_t, double slope, double d_frac) +{ + double t_frac = max_t * (1 - avg_d / (double)max_d); + int t1 = max_d / slope; + int t4 = max_t - t1 * d_frac; + int t3 = t4 - (t_frac - t1) / (1 - d_frac); + int t2 = t3 - t1 * (1 - d_frac); + + if (t1 < 0 || t1 > t2 || t2 > t3 || t3 > t4 || t4 > max_t) + return 0; + + s[1].time.seconds = t1; + s[1].depth.mm = max_d; + s[2].time.seconds = t2; + s[2].depth.mm = max_d; + s[3].time.seconds = t3; + s[3].depth.mm = max_d * d_frac; + s[4].time.seconds = t4; + s[4].depth.mm = max_d * d_frac; + + return 1; +} + +/* we have no average depth; instead of making up a random average depth + * we should assume either a PADI recrangular profile (for short and/or + * shallow dives) or more reasonably a six point profile with a 3 minute + * safety stop at 5m */ +static void fill_samples_no_avg(struct sample *s, int max_d, int max_t, double slope) +{ + // shallow or short dives are just trapecoids based on the given slope + if (max_d < 10000 || max_t < 600) { + s[1].time.seconds = max_d / slope; + s[1].depth.mm = max_d; + s[2].time.seconds = max_t - max_d / slope; + s[2].depth.mm = max_d; + } else { + s[1].time.seconds = max_d / slope; + s[1].depth.mm = max_d; + s[2].time.seconds = max_t - max_d / slope - 180; + s[2].depth.mm = max_d; + s[3].time.seconds = max_t - 5000 / slope - 180; + s[3].depth.mm = 5000; + s[4].time.seconds = max_t - 5000 / slope; + s[4].depth.mm = 5000; + } +} + +struct divecomputer *fake_dc(struct divecomputer *dc) +{ + static struct sample fake[6]; + static struct divecomputer fakedc; + + fakedc = (*dc); + fakedc.sample = fake; + fakedc.samples = 6; + + /* The dive has no samples, so create a few fake ones */ + int max_t = dc->duration.seconds; + int max_d = dc->maxdepth.mm; + int avg_d = dc->meandepth.mm; + + memset(fake, 0, sizeof(fake)); + fake[5].time.seconds = max_t; + if (!max_t || !max_d) + return &fakedc; + + /* + * We want to fake the profile so that the average + * depth ends up correct. However, in the absense of + * a reasonable average, let's just make something + * up. Note that 'avg_d == max_d' is _not_ a reasonable + * average. + * We explicitly treat avg_d == 0 differently */ + if (avg_d == 0) { + /* we try for a sane slope, but bow to the insanity of + * the user supplied data */ + fill_samples_no_avg(fake, max_d, max_t, MAX(2.0 * max_d / max_t, 5000.0 / 60)); + if (fake[3].time.seconds == 0) { // just a 4 point profile + fakedc.samples = 4; + fake[3].time.seconds = max_t; + } + return &fakedc; + } + if (avg_d < max_d / 10 || avg_d >= max_d) { + avg_d = (max_d + 10000) / 3; + if (avg_d > max_d) + avg_d = max_d * 2 / 3; + } + if (!avg_d) + avg_d = 1; + + /* + * Ok, first we try a basic profile with a specific ascent + * rate (5 meters per minute) and d_frac (1/3). + */ + if (fill_samples(fake, max_d, avg_d, max_t, 5000.0 / 60, 0.33)) + return &fakedc; + + /* + * Ok, assume that didn't work because we cannot make the + * average come out right because it was a quick deep dive + * followed by a much shallower region + */ + if (fill_samples(fake, max_d, avg_d, max_t, 10000.0 / 60, 0.10)) + return &fakedc; + + /* + * Uhhuh. That didn't work. We'd need to find a good combination that + * satisfies our constraints. Currently, we don't, we just give insane + * slopes. + */ + if (fill_samples(fake, max_d, avg_d, max_t, 10000.0, 0.01)) + return &fakedc; + + /* Even that didn't work? Give up, there's something wrong */ + return &fakedc; +} |