[Ovmsdev] New Metric Units
Michael Balzer
dexter at expeedo.de
Sat Dec 3 02:28:15 HKT 2022
Michael,
the unit conversion JS code scheme is fine. Btw, you can optimize
convert to…
convert = function (from, to, value) {
return (unit_conversions[from + ">" + to] ||
unit_conversions.native)(value);
}
> I knew we had to keep the default webstream as it was. I was thinking
> of having a different websocket Uri to trigger filtered mode (starting
> without sending all units).
> Especially, I was also considering the plugins that run from the '#'
> container that may not know the container had switched to user units!
> (so I'm not sure about option a.), so from what I can tell, the base
> metrics[] needs to maintain native units imho. This is also why I was
> looking at the 'auto-subscribe' idea since the outside container
> doesn't know which metrics a plugin might use, and a plugin wouldn't
> know to subscribe to the messages.
I think plugins will need to be updated anyway, as will all our standard
pages & components, as up to now all units have been fixed in the UI.
In both approaches, all metrics displays (simple markup, tables, charts)
will need to be reworked to use the user units. Only the basic markup
type displays could partially be modified automatically (by walking
through their '.unit' elements), but any extended use, even the range &
energy displays in the dashboard's speed gauge, will need a config-aware
approach.
Charts will need to fully reconfigure, as unit labels are used within
different chart features, and axis limits & plotbands will need to be
adjusted. For this, scripts can subscribe to a new 'msg:units' event
sent when a (re-)configuration of units is received.
Btw, in case you didn't see this already: I implemented an auto
subscription scheme for the 'stream' notifications -- these are by
default very transmission intense and can cause substantial load on the
module side as well. These subscriptions are managed automatically for
all components and plugins by the framework (which btw also takes care
of initializing all fragments added in the '#' container).
> We could maintain a units collection exactly as above with some proxy
> arrays to get at values without exceptions. For eg:
> m.label["v.p.speed"] could look up the units_ collection being
> maintained and return blank if the entry doesn't exist. Then
> m.value["v.p.speed"] would give the user unit and
> m.nativevalue["v.p.speed"] the native value. The latter two would use
> the metrics[] array or whatever mechanism we had. We could add
> m.text["v.p.speed"] that would give a text version with the value and
> unit if it had one.
That leads us to another option: we could keep the metrics transmission
in native values, add the units dictionary and provide all conversions
in Javascript using this proxy getter scheme.
That would keep the current metrics[] access scheme intact and
unchanged, so all current frontend code & plugins would continue to
work, using the native values as before.
The new proxy getters then can be used as the new way to access metrics
by anyone interested in using user units, and we can go ahead by
applying this to the standard pages and components.
This in combination with the 'msg:units' event to signal reconfiguration
should provide all we need.
We can even easily combine this with providing a command or socket URL /
parameter to switch the metrics into user mode. The standard web
frontend won't need this then, but it would make using user units easy
for devices without Javascript support.
Regards,
Michael
Am 28.11.22 um 00:36 schrieb Michael Geddes:
> Solved a couple of things.
> I have a 'unit conversion' code - which I current have put into a
> separate cpp file along with the two other C++ conversion functions.
> I wanted to do it this way so they are all in there together. (Does
> this make sense to do?).
>
> mi_to_km = function(mi) { return mi * 1.609347; }
> km_to_mi = function(km) { return km * 0.6213700; }
> pkm_to_pmi = function(pkm) { return pkm * 1.609347; }
> pmi_to_pkm = function(pmi) { return pmi * 0.6213700; }
> const feet_per_mile = 5280;
> var unit_conversions = {
> "native": function (value) { return value;},
> "km>miles": km_to_mi,
> "km>meters": function (value) { return value*1000; },
> "km>feet": function (value) { return
> km_to_mi(value) * feet_per_mile; },
> ......
> "percent>permille": function (value) { return value*10.0; },
> "percent>percent": function (value) { return value*0.10; }
> }
> convert_function = function (from, to) {
> var fn = undefined;
> if (from !== to && to !== "")
> fn = unit_conversions[from + ">" + to];
> if (fn == undefined)
> fn = unit_conversions.native;
> return fn;
> }
> convert = function (from, to, value) {
> var fn = convert_function(from, to);
> return fn(value);
> }
>
> The other problem of looking at the uri of the websocket I have solved
> by creating a 'SocketCreator' MgHandler class in
> the MG_EV_WEBSOCKET_HANDSHAKE_REQUEST event (and looks at the uri)...
> that waits for the
> MG_EV_WEBSOCKET_HANDSHAKE_DONE and deletes itself.
>
> int OvmsSocketCreator::HandleEvent(int ev, void *p)
> {
> if ( ev != MG_EV_WEBSOCKET_HANDSHAKE_DONE)
> return ev;
> // new websocket connection
> MyWebServer.CreateWebSocketHandler(m_nc, m_socket_type );
> m_nc = NULL;
> delete this;
> return 0;
> }
>
> Thoughts?
>
> //.ichael
>
> On Sun, 27 Nov 2022 at 07:18, Michael Geddes
> <frog at bunyip.wheelycreek.net> wrote:
>
> I knew we had to keep the default webstream as it was. I was
> thinking of having a different websocket Uri to trigger filtered
> mode (starting without sending all units).. Though I am struggling
> with how to get and then pass the Uri information into the web
> socket constructor! The event that currently creates it doesn't
> seem to have access to the Uri. (see below - p is NULL for
> HANDSHAKE_DONE).
> case MG_EV_WEBSOCKET_HANDSHAKE_REQUEST:
> {
> struct http_message *hm = (struct http_message *) p; // how to
> pass uri info to the event below!?
> }
> break;
> case MG_EV_WEBSOCKET_HANDSHAKE_DONE: // new websocket connection
> {
> MyWebServer.CreateWebSocketHandler(nc);
> }
> break;
>
>
> Especially, I was also considering the plugins that run from the
> '#' container that may not know the container had switched to user
> units! (so I'm not sure about option a.), so from what I can tell,
> the base metrics[] needs to maintain native units imho. This is
> also why I was looking at the 'auto-subscribe' idea since the
> outside container doesn't know which metrics a plugin might use,
> and a plugin wouldn't know to subscribe to the messages.
>
> I do like the separate units description message - though we would
> probably need to add the 'native' if we want to do conversions.
>
> { units: {
> "v.p.speed": { code: "kmph", *native "kmph",* label: "km/h" }, …
>
> We could maintain a units collection exactly as above with some
> proxy arrays to get at values without exceptions. For eg:
> m.label["v.p.speed"] could look up the units_ collection being
> maintained and return blank if the entry doesn't exist. Then
> m.value["v.p.speed"] would give the user unit and
> m.nativevalue["v.p.speed"] the native value. The latter two would
> use the metrics[] array or whatever mechanism we had. We could add
> m.text["v.p.speed"] that would give a text version with the value
> and unit if it had one.
>
> I had contemplated the idea of providing a JavaScript unit
> conversion and was working around it. Downside is it's a third set
> of conversion functions to maintain... On the other hand using
> that we could just keep the metrics being sent as it is now, have
> the groups sent as you proposed (along with the native unit code)
> , and have the above m.value[] proxy collection use a 'touser'
> function assigned to the units_ collection above that provided
> native to user conversion.
> We could send a javascript library constructed with just the
> necessary functions for the required conversions of native to user
> (or the whole lot.. whichever). .
> --
> var conversions = {
> unit: function ( value) { return value }
> km_miles: function (value) { return value * 0.6213700; }
> }
> We could perform the lookup when constructing the units and assign
> the touser property. (And have a 'unit' function that does
> no conversion).
>
> //.ichael
>
> On Sat, 26 Nov 2022, 10:43 pm Michael Balzer, <dexter at expeedo.de>
> wrote:
>
> The metrics subscription scheme is an option, and the
> auto-subscribe feature via a getter is a nice idea. But I
> wouldn't apply that to metrics value conversions and units.
>
> Also we would still need the current set of metrics to be
> subscribed by default, as there are also non Javascript
> devices (e.g. smart buttons, Wifi displays) reading the
> WebSocket stream.
>
> My thoughts on this so far:
>
> Basically the web UI, as any frontend, should adapt to unit
> configurations seamlessly. The web UI includes many command
> outputs, which already automatically switch units as configured.
>
> For all practical purposes, the web UI needs to interact with
> users in their preferred units. Only some plugins and
> functions will need certain values in metric (native) units
> for calculations, and these will also need a simple way to
> convert calculation results back to user units for displaying.
> So I think we need to provide the unit configuration and value
> conversion tools in the web framework as well.
>
> Proposal:
>
> a) We provide a config option and a WebSocket command to
> switch the WebSocket metrics transmission mode to user /
> native units. To keep plugin compatibility, the default is
> 'native'.
>
> b) We introduce a separate units dictionary object containing
> the user units for both metrics and the unit groups in their
> code & label representation. The units dictionary only needs
> to be sent initially, when new metrics are registered, when
> the metrics mode is changed for the current connection, and
> when some user unit configuration is changed, keeping the
> bandwidth and processing requirements low.
>
> The units dictionary can combine both metrics and group units,
> as the unit group names are fully distinct from the metrics
> namespace. The transport scheme could be:
>
> { units: {
> "v.p.speed": { code: "kmph", label: "km/h" }, …
> "units.distance": { code: "miles", label: "M" }, …
> }
>
> c) In the web framework, accessing units should be as simple
> as possible and avoid throwing exceptions for undefined
> entries, so we could e.g. split these into separate code &
> label objects:
>
> units["v.p.speed"] = "km/h" // consistently
> accompanies metrics["v.p.speed"]
> unitcodes["v.p.speed"] = "kmph"
>
> units["units.distance"] = "M"
> unitcodes["units.distance"] = "miles"
>
> …or provide a getter that tests for the key existence and
> returns an object with empty fields as necessary.
>
> With this, all metrics displays can easily be changed to
> display the actual unit labels instead of using fixed strings.
>
> d) To provide value conversion we implement UnitConvert() in
> Javascript plus some wrappers that automatically look up the
> unit for a given metrics/group name and do the conversion
> to/from native units, something like…
>
> var speed_kph = toNativeValue("v.p.speed"); // optional
> second arg to convert any data
> var speed_kph = metrics_native["v.p.speed"]; // using a getter
>
> var trip_display = toUserValue("units.distance", 1234);
>
>
> Plugins for scientific/technical applications that depend on
> native (metric) units can use the new metrics transmission
> mode control command to force native mode. Or they can choose
> to migrate from "metrics[]" to "metrics_native[]".
>
> The metrics mode config option can come with a note informing
> users that there may be some old plugins not compatible with
> non-native units. They can then check their plugins for this
> and make an informed decision on wether to enable user units
> and/or wether to install a specific plugin.
>
> Thoughts, comments?
>
> Regards,
> Michael
>
>
> Am 25.11.22 um 03:13 schrieb Michael Geddes:
>> I have an idea which might reduce traffic for maintaining the
>> metrics[] array in the browser and cope with the user units.
>> I'll start by saying I'm not a JS developer per se.. so a
>> newb in JS really. Still, it's mainly just another language
>> so .. we'll give it a go.
>>
>> Firstly:
>> * Implement the 'changed' filters as below for the
>> web-socket.. for both normal and 'user' values.
>> * Add a function that subscribes to a value (and returns the
>> current value of it)..including to 'user' value/unitlabel.
>>
>> Subscribing the normal way to the metrics over the websocket
>> would have the normal effect.. but we would have a new way
>> that would subscribe in a filtered way.
>>
>> I've had a little play with the Proxy object .. so at least I
>> know this should work:
>>
>> Have a metrics_ array that is the real associative array for
>> metrics[] and then define a Proxy that has (at the least)
>> 'get' and 'has' defined (giving us the ability to overload
>> /metrics['prop']/ and /"prop" in metrics operations/).
>>
>> The /get /function would return the underlying value if it
>> exists in the /metrics_ /array (which is maintained through
>> the websocket from currently subscribed values in the current
>> manner).
>> If the value is not in the /metrics_/ array - it would then
>> do a subscribe+query on the websocket getting the current
>> value and adding it into the /metrics_/ container. If it was
>> unavailable then it would put /undefined/ into the array.
>> The 'has' would do the get() and return true if the value was
>> not == /undefined/.
>>
>> For the 'query the websocket' bit, I'm assuming I would be
>> working with promises or futures or some such: I'll do the
>> research and do it properly unless somebody can help me out
>> with it. That's the bit I was going to work on next for the
>> proof-of-concept.
>>
>> Any immediate thoughts? Dangers?
>>
>> I also noticed there was a bit that went through html element
>> properties and looked for metrics .. this could be used to
>> bulk subscribe to any metric values required there.
>>
>> //.ichael
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 07:52, Michael Geddes
>> <frog at bunyip.wheelycreek.net> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, ok.
>>
>> I will get all the other 'user unit' stuff done as a line
>> in the sand, and then move to working out the web stuff.
>> I'm still finding my way though all the client side
>> javascript, which looks very cool.. but I've not really
>> done jQuery before (just enough to recognise it).
>>
>> Subscribing to metrics with/without user units makes a
>> lot of sense. Obviously the default needs to be
>> 'Subscribe to all metrics but not user units' to maintain
>> compatibility... but I was also thinking it might be nice
>> if we could filter down even the normal subscribed events.
>> We could have:
>> * Web socket command to filter units (flag on websocket
>> to say 'filtered' + flag bitset on each metric similar
>> to 'dirty')
>> Then either:
>> * Web socket command to turn on user units (single flag
>> on that websocket)
>> or
>> * Web socket command to turn on user units for specific
>> metrics (flag bitset on each metric)
>>
>> A parameter to the URI for the websocket could start the
>> socket in 'filtered' mode to avoid the initial rush of
>> metrics.
>>
>> This could drastically reduce traffic and time for the
>> metrics command to execute. It would be possible to also
>> check (on a 'filtered' websocket) for any changes to
>> metrics for that websocket slot before queueing the
>> 'metric update' socket command.
>>
>> //.ichael
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 00:35, Michael Balzer
>> <dexter at expeedo.de> wrote:
>>
>> Michael,
>>
>> I don't have much spare time currently, just some
>> quick first comments: it's important to implement
>> this as lightweight as possible, both in terms of
>> network load and client CPU & memory requirements.
>> Some devices already have issues, which can be seen
>> by the "websocket overflow" messages. The web UI also
>> should stay usable via cellular.
>>
>> My impression is the new scheme, while only slightly
>> raising the client requirements, adds substantially
>> to the network requirements.
>>
>> An option could be to separate the units -- or more,
>> back when implementing this I thought about
>> separating the names later on. Another question is if
>> we normally generally need both the native and the
>> converted values in the web UI. We maybe could
>> provide an option to switch to converted values, or
>> add an option to retreive or subscribe to a set of
>> converted metrics on demand.
>>
>> Standard plugins like ABRP and PwrMon rely on getting
>> metric (native) units, and there probably are
>> non-public plugins, e.g. for engineering & scientific
>> projects, that depend on metric units to do their
>> calculations and don't need anything else. We
>> shouldn't make life harder for these applications
>> without good reason.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 15.11.22 um 01:26 schrieb Michael Geddes:
>>> If you're ok with the [default] option I'll stick
>>> with that. I mean in some ways it would be nice to
>>> have a button choice
>>> metric | usa | europe | asia | custom etc and I
>>> kind of considered something like that but figured
>>> it's only a handful of choices.. and it's an
>>> embedded device.. so simpler is better.
>>>
>>> On a related note - I was thinking how it would be
>>> nice if the dashboard (etc) had access to the 'user'
>>> units, so went hunting down that little rabbit hole.
>>> Quite a nice mechanism with the web socket updating
>>> the "metrics" object in the UI.
>>> This is a snippet of one idea, which is that for any
>>> metric that has the possibility of a user unit, we
>>> set the extra values of the metric with '#unit' and
>>> '#user' appended - see below. (I've chosen '#'
>>> arbitrarily.. but it could be '/' or ':' or '>' but
>>> maybe not '.' )
>>>
>>> v.p.odometer#unit: "M"
>>> v.p.odometer#user: 6754.91
>>> v.p.satcount: 13
>>> v.p.speed: 0
>>> v.p.speed#unit: "km/h"
>>> v.p.speed#user: null
>>> *v.p.trip: 28*
>>> *v.p.trip#unit: "M"
>>> v.p.trip#user: 17.3984*
>>>
>>> Then we can use this in the dials to populate the
>>> values and captions! (not that I like Miles).
>>> I
>>>
>>> image.png
>>>
>>> The other (similar) way was to have something like
>>> the following:
>>> "v.p.trip#user" : { "value": 17.3984, "unit": "M" }
>>> It wouldn't make the total message any shorter..
>>> soo.. dunno.
>>>
>>> There's also some complications with setting up the
>>> dials (for min/max values) - like for the speed.
>>>
>>> Notice also that I'm returning null for undefined
>>> values. It's nice - but I'm not sure how javascript
>>> handles null when used / printed etc.
>>>
>>> //.ichael
>>>
>>> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 21:06, Michael Balzer
>>> <dexter at expeedo.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Michael,
>>>
>>> looks good.
>>>
>>> I think having an explicit 'default' option is
>>> better than taking the 'Metric' equivalent for
>>> that, as in your example you already show unit
>>> alternatives within the metric system to support
>>> different scalings (kW / W, kWh / Wh). (Btw…
>>> waiting for someone to miss Horsepower & BTU
>>> here ;-))
>>>
>>> @Patrick, I think that also answers your
>>> implicit question:
>>>> The default button makes it unclear what the actual setting is.
>>>
>>> The default (native unit) is always metric, but
>>> you may have a mix of scalings, as we try to
>>> find the one that fits best for the given
>>> application when defining a metric. For example
>>> the current driving energy consumption is stored
>>> natively in Wh/km, while the energy used or
>>> regenerated is in kWh, and the odometer & trip
>>> counters are in km, while the altitude ist in m.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 13.11.22 um 08:42 schrieb Michael Geddes:
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> so this is my idea of being able to select
>>>> which units various groups use (in addition to
>>>> Distance).
>>>> This can be then accessed by the special 'user'
>>>> unit code. (or 'metrics list -u ' )
>>>> The idea of [Default] selection below simply
>>>> means storing the value to blank - meaning use
>>>> whatever unit the particular metric uses. The
>>>> other idea I had was to actually default it to
>>>> the equivalent of 'Metric' special unit code
>>>> and not have the [Default] button.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> image.png
>>>>
>>>> Currently I've made it so that if there are
>>>> more than 3 choices other than [default] that
>>>> it uses the choice/combo box rather than the
>>>> Radio buttons. (ie this list is auto-generated
>>>> from the Metric Units table and the Metric
>>>> Groups table).
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts / comments?
>>>>
>>>> //.ichael
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 17:35, Michael Geddes
>>>> <frog at bunyip.wheelycreek.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pull/771
>>>>
>>>> I'm hoping this P/R is ok in this form
>>>> (made of 5 separate commits).
>>>>
>>>> I will have a look at implementing the
>>>> "user" unit code. The base for how it
>>>> would work is already a part of the above
>>>> pull request. I'll just look at the module
>>>> configuration for distance.
>>>>
>>>> The 'power consumption' is one where it's
>>>> not just a check-box.. there're 5 possible
>>>> choice!
>>>>
>>>> I should also add 'bar' for pressure given
>>>> that for some reason that's still a thing
>>>> people want.
>>>>
>>>> //.ichael
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 12 Nov 2022 at 16:24, Michael
>>>> Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think this is pretty decent &
>>>> complete now.
>>>>
>>>> I also like the approach of the 'user'
>>>> unit code. Moving all user unit prefs
>>>> into the module configuration is an old
>>>> todo. Currently only the distance unit
>>>> is defined at the module side,
>>>> temperature and pressure are App prefs.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 11.11.22 um 09:54 schrieb Michael
>>>> Geddes:
>>>>> Ok - so here's what I have implemented
>>>>> for Duktape and Metrics. (I added
>>>>> IsDefined() as well).
>>>>> Any thoughts on this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Noting
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Float( {metric} ) ->
>>>>> Outputs metric as float (same)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Float( {metric}, {unit})
>>>>> -> Outputs metric as float converted
>>>>> to given unit (new)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value( {metric} ) ->
>>>>> Outputs Metric in native value (same)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value( {metric} , false)
>>>>> -> Outputs Metric as string and no
>>>>> units (same)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value( {metric} ,
>>>>> {unit}) -> Outputs Metric converted
>>>>> to given unit as native value. (new)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value( {metric} , {unit},
>>>>> false ) -> Outputs Metric converted
>>>>> to given unit as string including any
>>>>> unit specifier. (new)
>>>>> also OvmsMetric.GetValues( {metric}
>>>>> [,{unit}] [, {converted} ] ) Adds
>>>>> similar behaviour to Value() above.
>>>>> also the special units '*imperial*'
>>>>> and '*metric*' will convert to the
>>>>> associated imperial / metric version
>>>>> of the units as appropriate.
>>>>>
>>>>> (function() {
>>>>> dump = function (metric) { print(
>>>>> metric+ " ["+(typeof metric)+"]\n" ); }
>>>>> dump_obj = function (obj ) {
>>>>> print('--- Object ----\n')
>>>>> for (var k in obj) {
>>>>> xk = obj[k];
>>>>> print( k+':'+ xk + ' ['+typeof
>>>>> xk+ "]\n");
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption"));
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> false));
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption","kmpkwh"));
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> "mipkwh", false));
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.AsFloat("xiq.v.trip.consumption"));
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.AsFloat("xiq.v.trip.consumption","kmpkwh"));
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption","imperial"))
>>>>> dump(OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption","imperial",
>>>>> false))
>>>>> dump_obj(OvmsMetrics.GetValues("trip",
>>>>> "metric"))
>>>>> dump_obj(OvmsMetrics.GetValues("trip",
>>>>> "imperial", false))
>>>>> })();
>>>>>
>>>>> With this output:
>>>>> 19.2308 [number]
>>>>> 19.2308 [string]
>>>>> 5.2 [number]
>>>>> 3.23112mi/kWh [string]
>>>>> 19.2308 [number]
>>>>> 5.2 [number]
>>>>> 309.49 [number]
>>>>> 309.49Wh/mi [string]
>>>>> --- Object ----
>>>>> v.p.trip:13 [number]
>>>>> xiq.e.trip:0 [number]
>>>>> xiq.e.trip.energy.recuperated:0 [number]
>>>>> xiq.e.trip.energy.used:0 [number]
>>>>> xiq.v.trip.consumption:19.2308 [number]
>>>>> --- Object ----
>>>>> v.p.trip:8.07781M [string]
>>>>> xiq.e.trip:0M [string]
>>>>> xiq.e.trip.energy.recuperated:0kWh [string]
>>>>> xiq.e.trip.energy.used:0kWh [string]
>>>>> xiq.v.trip.consumption:309.49Wh/mi [string]
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022 at 05:47, Michael
>>>>> Geddes <frog at bunyip.wheelycreek.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah - I like HasValue. I
>>>>> implemented IsDefined() but I will
>>>>> rename it.. that's a much clearer
>>>>> name.
>>>>>
>>>>> Another thought. How about if we
>>>>> did this (but also with
>>>>> GetValues() as well - see the
>>>>> special values below)
>>>>>
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> true) -> 17.0582 (Number)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> false) -> 17.0582 (String)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> "mipkwh", true) -> 3.64264 (Number)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> "mipkwh", false) ->
>>>>> 3.64264Mi/kWh (String)
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> "native", false) ->
>>>>> 17.0582km/kWh (String)
>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>> "imperial", false) ->
>>>>> 3.64264Mi/kWh (String)
>>>>>
>>>>> I have already implemented the
>>>>> special values 'native'
>>>>> (existing), 'imperial' and 'metric'.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was also thinking that in the
>>>>> future you could have 'user'.
>>>>> Where for each group of values:
>>>>> 'temperature', 'distance',
>>>>> 'shortdistance', 'power' etc.. you
>>>>> could have a user preference. I
>>>>> probably won't implement it
>>>>> now,.but it could be cool that any
>>>>> UI could just ask for the user
>>>>> defined units (rather than having
>>>>> a separate choice).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> //.ichael
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 21:57, Mark
>>>>> Webb-Johnson
>>>>> <mark at webb-johnson.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Or perhaps something more
>>>>> specific?
>>>>>
>>>>> HasValue()
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8 Nov 2022, at 9:01 PM,
>>>>>> Michael Balzer
>>>>>> <dexter at expeedo.de> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed PGP part
>>>>>> That's basically a good
>>>>>> approach, but be aware
>>>>>> 'IsDefined()' has an
>>>>>> ambiguous meaning here, as
>>>>>> with the API stem
>>>>>> "OvmsMetrics" it would
>>>>>> naturally be expected to mean
>>>>>> "is this metric defined", not
>>>>>> "does this metric have a
>>>>>> defined value".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An undefined metric currently
>>>>>> can be derived from
>>>>>> 'Values()' returning
>>>>>> undefined, but that's more an
>>>>>> undocumented side effect than
>>>>>> intended.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe 'GetDefined()' could be
>>>>>> a better name, leveraging
>>>>>> this behaviour, i.e.
>>>>>> returning 'undefined' for an
>>>>>> actually undefined metric,
>>>>>> and 'null' for a defined
>>>>>> metric without a value.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 08.11.22 um 13:46 schrieb
>>>>>> Michael Geddes:
>>>>>>> Ah yes. Arrays - will check
>>>>>>> those. Yeah, how about we
>>>>>>> add a 'IsDefined' method to
>>>>>>> metrics instead of the null
>>>>>>> thing (it does sound like it
>>>>>>> will upset too many applecarts).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> //.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2022 at 20:35,
>>>>>>> Michael Balzer
>>>>>>> <dexter at expeedo.de> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> looks all good to me,
>>>>>>> once again nice find
>>>>>>> with the decode
>>>>>>> argument. Adding decode
>>>>>>> to the Value() call was
>>>>>>> only for symmetry IIRC,
>>>>>>> the main use was with
>>>>>>> GetValues()
>>>>>>> (https://docs.openvehicles.com/en/latest/userguide/scripting.html#ovmsmetrics).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Don't forget to test
>>>>>>> arrays, e.g.
>>>>>>> "v.t.pressure" & "v.t.temp".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Returning null for an
>>>>>>> undefined metric seems
>>>>>>> like a natural choice,
>>>>>>> but is a rather deep
>>>>>>> change, as for
>>>>>>> consistency not only the
>>>>>>> Duktape metrics API but
>>>>>>> also the Web UI metrics
>>>>>>> API would need to be
>>>>>>> changed accordingly.
>>>>>>> Unless you've got a real
>>>>>>> use case that needs
>>>>>>> that, we should be careful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 07.11.22 um 15:00
>>>>>>> schrieb Michael Geddes:
>>>>>>>> I have figured out a
>>>>>>>> bunch of stuff and have
>>>>>>>> implemented the
>>>>>>>> following: (having done
>>>>>>>> away with needing
>>>>>>>> AsFloatUnit)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value(
>>>>>>>> {metric} [, {decode}])
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value(
>>>>>>>> {metric}, {unit}
>>>>>>>> [,{decode}])
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It turns out that the
>>>>>>>> [decode] flag wasn't
>>>>>>>> working anyway (since
>>>>>>>> the function was being
>>>>>>>> registered as only
>>>>>>>> having 1 param)...
>>>>>>>> This way it is still
>>>>>>>> really 1 function.. but
>>>>>>>> I check it the second
>>>>>>>> parameter is a
>>>>>>>> 'boolean', and if not..
>>>>>>>> try the second form.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.AsFloat(
>>>>>>>> {metric} [,{unit}] )
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> and add the function
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ovms.Metrics.ValueUnit(
>>>>>>>> {metric} [,{unit}])
>>>>>>>> This prints the value
>>>>>>>> and the unit.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's a sample
>>>>>>>> function and the
>>>>>>>> output! This also shows
>>>>>>>> the types of the output.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (function() {
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption");
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x+"\n" );
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>>>>> false);
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x +"\n" );
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption","kmpkwh")
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x +"\n");
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.Value("xiq.v.trip.consumption",
>>>>>>>> "mipkwh", false)
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x +"\n");
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.ValueUnit("xiq.v.trip.consumption")
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x +"\n");
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.ValueUnit("xiq.v.trip.consumption","mipkwh")
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x +"\n");
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.AsFloat("xiq.v.trip.consumption")
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x +"\n");
>>>>>>>> x =
>>>>>>>> OvmsMetrics.AsFloat("xiq.v.trip.consumption","kmpkwh")
>>>>>>>> print( (typeof x) +
>>>>>>>> ": "+ x +"\n");
>>>>>>>> })();
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> number: 17.0582
>>>>>>>> string: 17.0582
>>>>>>>> number: 5.86227
>>>>>>>> string: 3.64264
>>>>>>>> string: 17.0582kWh/100km
>>>>>>>> string: 3.64264mi/kWh
>>>>>>>> number: 17.0582
>>>>>>>> number: 5.86227
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It still might be an
>>>>>>>> idea to use 'null' as a
>>>>>>>> return value if the
>>>>>>>> metrics is!IsDefined()
>>>>>>>> but that would be
>>>>>>>> changing the existing
>>>>>>>> behaviour slightly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> //.ichael
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 7 Nov 2022 at
>>>>>>>> 08:12, Michael Geddes
>>>>>>>> <frog at bunyip.wheelycreek.net>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've worked out
>>>>>>>> what the decode
>>>>>>>> flag is for and how
>>>>>>>> it works, and I
>>>>>>>> think how optional
>>>>>>>> params work.
>>>>>>>> I'm pretty sure I
>>>>>>>> won't need the
>>>>>>>> 'AsFloatUnit'
>>>>>>>> function; the unit
>>>>>>>> would be an option
>>>>>>>> to AsFloat(); I'll
>>>>>>>> know that soon.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The 'Value'
>>>>>>>> function is more
>>>>>>>> complicated because
>>>>>>>> of the optional
>>>>>>>> decode bool. I
>>>>>>>> guess I could add
>>>>>>>> the Unit to the end
>>>>>>>> of that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ValueUnit could be
>>>>>>>> still useful then
>>>>>>>> to provide a
>>>>>>>> 'Value + Unit'.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Question: Is there
>>>>>>>> a reason we
>>>>>>>> shouldn't be
>>>>>>>> returning with
>>>>>>>> duk_push_null if
>>>>>>>> the metric
>>>>>>>> !IsDefined() in
>>>>>>>> both AsFloat() and
>>>>>>>> Value(metric,true)
>>>>>>>> cases?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> //.ichael
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sun, 6 Nov 2022
>>>>>>>> at 11:22, Michael
>>>>>>>> Geddes
>>>>>>>> <frog at bunyip.wheelycreek.net>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Right, so I've
>>>>>>>> implemented
>>>>>>>> some stuff that
>>>>>>>> seems to work
>>>>>>>> quite well.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/openvehicles/Open-Vehicle-Monitoring-System-3/pull/764
>>>>>>>> should be ready
>>>>>>>> now after a
>>>>>>>> couple of
>>>>>>>> stupid mistakes
>>>>>>>> slipped
>>>>>>>> through. This
>>>>>>>> absolutely
>>>>>>>> needs somebody
>>>>>>>> to review it
>>>>>>>> please!
>>>>>>>> (There's a
>>>>>>>> reason why I've
>>>>>>>> converted some
>>>>>>>> if()'s to
>>>>>>>> switch() -
>>>>>>>> which is that
>>>>>>>> it will be used
>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>> follow-up commit).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The commit that
>>>>>>>> will follow on
>>>>>>>> from that it
>>>>>>>> implements the
>>>>>>>> new Units:
>>>>>>>> kWh/100km,
>>>>>>>> km/kWh and mi/kWh.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a
>>>>>>>> summary of what
>>>>>>>> I've
>>>>>>>> implemented for
>>>>>>>> scripting -
>>>>>>>> including
>>>>>>>> showing the
>>>>>>>> unit codes I
>>>>>>>> have so far.
>>>>>>>> I've considered
>>>>>>>> a few things:
>>>>>>>> * Should some
>>>>>>>> of the longer
>>>>>>>> unit codes be
>>>>>>>> shortened (eg
>>>>>>>> mi, mins, m,
>>>>>>>> ft, deg, perc)
>>>>>>>> * The unit
>>>>>>>> codes could be
>>>>>>>> much more
>>>>>>>> regular and
>>>>>>>> separated by
>>>>>>>> dots eg:
>>>>>>>> watthours -> w.h
>>>>>>>> kwhp100km ->
>>>>>>>> kw.h_100km or
>>>>>>>> kw.h/100km
>>>>>>>> miph ->
>>>>>>>> mi_h or mi/h
>>>>>>>> (or should it
>>>>>>>> be mph).
>>>>>>>> psi ->
>>>>>>>> p_in.in
>>>>>>>> <http://p_in.in/>
>>>>>>>> or p/in.in
>>>>>>>> <http://in.in/>
>>>>>>>> or lb_in.in
>>>>>>>> <http://lb_in.in/>
>>>>>>>> (yes, slightly
>>>>>>>> weird, but
>>>>>>>> predictable)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *OVMS# metric
>>>>>>>> units*
>>>>>>>> km : km
>>>>>>>> miles : M
>>>>>>>> meters : m
>>>>>>>> feet : ft
>>>>>>>> celcius : °C
>>>>>>>> fahrenheit : °F
>>>>>>>> kpa : kPa
>>>>>>>> pa : Pa
>>>>>>>> psi : psi
>>>>>>>> volts : V
>>>>>>>> amps : A
>>>>>>>> amphours: Ah
>>>>>>>> kw : kW
>>>>>>>> kwh : kWh
>>>>>>>> watts : W
>>>>>>>> watthours: Wh
>>>>>>>> seconds : Sec
>>>>>>>> minutes : Min
>>>>>>>> hours : Hour
>>>>>>>> utc : UTC
>>>>>>>> degrees : °
>>>>>>>> kmph : km/h
>>>>>>>> miph: Mph
>>>>>>>> kmphps: km/h/s
>>>>>>>> miphps: Mph/s
>>>>>>>> mpss : m/s²
>>>>>>>> dbm : dBm
>>>>>>>> sq : sq
>>>>>>>> percent : %
>>>>>>>> whpkm : Wh/km
>>>>>>>> whpmi: Wh/mi
>>>>>>>> kwhp100km :
>>>>>>>> kWh/100km
>>>>>>>> kmpkwh: km/kWh
>>>>>>>> mipkwh: mi/kWh
>>>>>>>> nm : Nm
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *OVMS# metric
>>>>>>>> unit mi*
>>>>>>>> miles : M
>>>>>>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.openvehicles.com
> http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
--
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20221202/1adbcf69/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 203 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20221202/1adbcf69/attachment-0001.sig>
More information about the OvmsDev
mailing list