| Author |  Topic  |  | 
              
                | SnailsAttack
  
 
                USA8 Posts
 | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/11/2023 :  14:53:21     
 |  
                      |  
 My counter is computing 12981 counts in 12 hours as "18.2" CPM when it's supposed to read 18.03 CPM, rounding to the hundredths place.
 
 12981 / (12 * 60) = 18.02917 ...
 
 I think it somehow dropped the tenths place because it's a zero, and didn't factor in the thousandths place (although to be fair the difference is negligible).
 
 Is this a known bug? It usually gives correct CPM estimates from the duration and number of counts (aside from not considering the thousandths place when rounding).
 
 
 |  | 
              
                | Reply #1 ullix
      
 
                Germany1222 Posts
 | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/12/2023 :  00:10:01     
 |  
                      | Strange, indeed. 
 I tried it the other way: producing 12981 counts with CPM=18.2 would take 405.5 sec or 6.76 min LESS than 12h. That is a lot.
 
 In this case it does not matter much, but it makes you wonder where else the calculation is done incorrectly ...
 
 
 |  
                      |  |  | 
              
                | Reply #2 Damien68
      
 
                France780 Posts
 | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/12/2023 :  04:56:19     
 |  
                      | I already saw a bug like that somewhere I don't remember where, it was a bug when displaying: maybe it should display:
 - the integer part: 18 is OK
 - followed by a dot '.' is OK
 - followed by the fractional part 02 displayed as an integer i.e. like a 2 . is NOK.
 
 I think it looks like :)
 |  
                      | Mastery is acquired by studying, with it everything becomes simple
 |  
                      | Edited by - Damien68 on 01/12/2023  05:04:49
 |  
                      |  |  | 
              
                | Reply #3 EmfDev
      
 
                2360 Posts | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/12/2023 :  15:02:53     
 |  
                      | Hi SnailsAttack, yes it may be a bug, I will send it to our devs so they can check it. |  
                      |  |  | 
              
                | Reply #4 SnailsAttack
  
 
                USA8 Posts
 | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/12/2023 :  17:09:42     
 |  
                      | quote:Yes. It's not a big error in this case, but it has the potential to be, particularly for low CPM measurements that happen to have a large number in the hundredths place (e.g. 10.09 CPM misread as 10.90).Originally posted by ullix
 
 In this case it does not matter much, but it makes you wonder where else the calculation is done incorrectly ...
 
 
 
 
 quote:Okay. Thank you.Originally posted by EmfDev
 
 Hi SnailsAttack, yes it may be a bug, I will send it to our devs so they can check it.
 
 
 
 
 |  
                      |  |  | 
              
                | Reply #5 SnailsAttack
  
 
                USA8 Posts
 | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/19/2023 :  06:33:44     
 |  
                      |  
 Here's another instance of the bug occurring.
 |  
                      |  |  | 
              
                | Reply #6 ullix
      
 
                Germany1222 Posts
 | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/20/2023 :  01:50:09     
 |  
                      | :-)) 
 It would be hilarious if Damien's suspicion became true, because the C language - in which the firmware is coded - has a well established function for formatting numbers since eons.
 |  
                      |  |  | 
              
                | Reply #7 EmfDev
      
 
                2360 Posts | 
                    
                      |  Posted - 01/26/2023 :  17:48:34     
 |  
                      | Damien68 is right and has appeared before in the forum. Not sure if it was from 500/600+ but I thought this bug was fixed on all devices but actually not for 300/320 series. Now it has been fixed and will be released in the next firmware update together with alarm volume addition. 
 |  
                      |  |  | 
              
                |  |  Topic  |  |