Updates for v0.9.2 #142
Updates for v0.9.2 #142
Conversation
|
|
||
| # Calculate the total time as seconds plus fractional seconds from nanoseconds and attoseconds | ||
| total_time = ssec + (nsec * 1e-9) | ||
| base_time = datetime(1970, 1, 1) + timedelta(seconds=ssec, microseconds=nsec / 1_000) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This new approach is library-based. The original code was written as non-Pythonic, non library-based, and as simple as possible, in order to facilitate porting to other less-capable embedded languages like C. Making the code more Pythonic and library-based makes the code less easy to port. But if you don't think that is a priority, I can live with it this way. My primary goal in writing the parser was to have /something/ in place for the first public release and big announcement at MTS.
| return base_time.strftime(f"%Y-%jT%H:%M:%S.{nsec}") | ||
| else: | ||
| # Return individual components based on 'part' argument | ||
| parts_map = { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As above, this is now a Pythonic data struct, not as easy to port to C language. But if you think this is the way to go with examples, I can live with it.
| return (1000.0/25.4) | ||
|
|
||
| def get_camera_translation(self, dimension): | ||
| """Return a single axis of camera translation, such as: x,y, or z""" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You'll have to add this string back in, as it was omitted below. (Or the docs won't have anything for this method.)
| return tr["translation"]["z"] * self.trans_mult | ||
| print("found camera, dim = {}, mult factor: {}".format(dimension.value, self.trans_mult)) | ||
| if (dimension == Translation.X): | ||
| return tr["translation"][Translation.X.value] * self.trans_mult.conversion_factor_from_meters() |
| break | ||
| return None | ||
|
|
||
| def get_camera_rotation(self, dimension): | ||
| """Return a single axis of camera rotation like pan, tilt, or roll. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add the documentation string back in, it got omitted below.
| if self.validate_dict_elements(self.pd,["timing","sampleRate","num"]): | ||
| numerator = float(self.pd["timing"]["sampleRate"]["num"]) | ||
| denominator = float(self.pd["timing"]["sampleRate"]["denom"]) | ||
| if self.validate_dict_elements(self.pd,["timing","frameRate","num"]): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As of today the generated static sample still has this:
"timing": {
"sampleRate": {
"num": 24000,
"denom": 1001
},
Is this changing to "frameRate" via some PR ? If it doesn't this code will fail.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sampleRate is the current key name in 0.9.1
| <tr> | ||
| <td>112–127</td> | ||
| <td>Checksum (Fletcher16)</td> | ||
| <td>2 bytes: A 16-bit checksum computed using the Fletcher-16 algorithm, covering the header and payload (excluding checksum bytes)</td> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Don't we need to say that you should zero out the checksum when generating the packet?
|
@makkbe the tests are failing on the 'leader' vs. 'master' change. You should just be able to find replace in test_model.py to get them passing... |
Updates to library, sender, and receiver to match OpenTrackIO 0.9.2.