Handling of channel count > 999
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2022 9:43 am
Dear colleagues,
since version 1.4 there is a extension available to handle more than 999 channels in the storage.
In RED A 1.4 you will find: Variant A
We have interpreted "channel number" as "number of the channel" and not as "channel count" and so
in our implementation we do handle the numbering for channel numbers like:
<testname>.001
<testname>.002
...
<testname>.999
<testname>.1000
<testname>.1001
...
In the <testname>.chn file this will be reflected like:
Variant B
It seem that the statement from RED A can be interpreted as:
"Number all channels with a 4 digit file extension if there are more than 999 channel."
So here "channel number" is interpreted as "channel count".
Like:
<testname>.0001
<testname>.0002
...
<testname>.0999
<testname>.1000
<testname>.1001
...
How is this actually implemented and understood in other tools?
We should formulate the extension so that there is a unique understanding of how to implement this.
Best also with some demo lines like above in RED A.
Kind regards,
Dirk
since version 1.4 there is a extension available to handle more than 999 channels in the storage.
In RED A 1.4 you will find: Variant A
We have interpreted "channel number" as "number of the channel" and not as "channel count" and so
in our implementation we do handle the numbering for channel numbers like:
<testname>.001
<testname>.002
...
<testname>.999
<testname>.1000
<testname>.1001
...
In the <testname>.chn file this will be reflected like:
Code: Select all
Name of channel 001 :10..
Name of channel 002 :10..
...
Name of channel 999 :B0..
Name of channel 1000 :B0..
Name of channel 1001 :B0..
...
It seem that the statement from RED A can be interpreted as:
"Number all channels with a 4 digit file extension if there are more than 999 channel."
So here "channel number" is interpreted as "channel count".
Like:
<testname>.0001
<testname>.0002
...
<testname>.0999
<testname>.1000
<testname>.1001
...
How is this actually implemented and understood in other tools?
We should formulate the extension so that there is a unique understanding of how to implement this.
Best also with some demo lines like above in RED A.
Kind regards,
Dirk