Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: SDAT-6
Type: New Feature New Feature
Status: Closed Closed
Resolution: Fixed
Priority: Major Major
Assignee: dinesh
Reporter: Kinesia
Votes: 0
Watchers: 0
Operations

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
Auc-ScanData

Show colour information on stack sizes for trade goods, etc.

Created: 17/Jan/08 06:27 PM   Updated: 28/Jan/10 09:21 AM
Component/s: Stats
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

File Attachments: None
Image Attachments:

1. WoWScrnShot_082309_104230a.jpg
(34 kB)


 Description  « Hide
When holding shift down to get the 'full' view of the scandata, also show the how the colour price breaks down by different stack sizes to help you know which sizes you can undercut...

 All   Comments   Change History   Transitions   FishEye   Crucible      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
dinesh added a comment - 23/Aug/09 10:49 AM
This was fixed in r2768.

However, it is buggy. In line 282:
if (dist.stack and #(dist.stack) > 1) then

#(dist.stack) is not returning the number of different stack sizes in the snapshot. For unstackable items it always appears to be 1. But for stackable items, I have seen it range from 0 to 8, and the number is not the number of stack sizes, nor the number of different price categories. I haven't been ale to figure out what it is indicating, but because it is not the number of stack sizes, it will sometimes hide or show the stack size breakdown at inappropriate times.

See attachment for some debugging output I've added to show the value of #(dist.stack) and then the breakdown of stacksizes actually in the snapshot for that item (these are correct, according to actual browse pane results).


dinesh added a comment - 23/Aug/09 10:52 AM
SS of debug output showing that #(dist.stack) is not returning the number of stack sizes in the snapshot.

dinesh added a comment - 23/Aug/09 11:16 AM - edited
OK, I know what is going on. #(dist.stack) returns the number of stacks up until the first missing number, if counting upwards from 1. e.g.:
  • say you have an item with no stacks of 1 in the snapshot. Then it will return a 0, regardless if there are any higher stacks. '
  • say you have some number of 1 stacks, some number of 2 stack, some number of 3 stacks, and some number of 10 stacks. It will return 3, because the first missing stack size is 4.

dinesh added a comment - 23/Aug/09 02:42 PM
will implement change suggested by Shirik.

Bryan (brykrys) added a comment - 28/Jan/10 09:21 AM
Reclosing as appears to be fixed now