-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Waveform records ignore NELM keyword if initial_value is set #37
Comments
There are I think two or maybe three issues here:
I guess the next step is to work out what the initialisation API should be, preferably without breaking reasonable existing usage. |
Regarding (1), is there a reason that Although at this stage I suppose we have to keep Regarding (2), I think the fix is simply:
Regarding (3), that's my exact use-case right now. I need to create a very long but mostly empty Waveform, using a short |
Other fails appear to be the spawned Validate Process not correctly updating, or possibly not being removed from previous test run, on each iteration. Workaround is to give each one a unique device prefix and add logging to work out what it might be for future issues.
Other fails appear to be the spawned Validate Process not correctly updating, or possibly not being removed from previous test run, on each iteration. Workaround is to give each one a unique device prefix and add logging to work out what it might be for future issues.
If you specify both an
initial_value=...
andNELM=...
keywords when creating a WaveformOut record, theNELM
keyword is ignored and the waveform is created with a maximum length equal to the length of the data.I think the offending line is L169 of builder.py, which seems to override the passed in NELM without checking if it is set:
fields['NELM'] = length
There is a workaround: instead of
initial_value
andNELM
, use something like this (assumingdata
is a numpy array)And later do
myrecord.set(data)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: