topic Re: 13 of 12 in Installation & update

13 of 12

Red — Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:16:39 GMT

Has anyone else ever noticed this?

Re: 13 of 12

__archiben — Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:41:07 GMT

had it with cache library synchronisation. phase so-many-thousand of 19 or some similar nonsense!

http://www.graphisoft.com/community/archicad-talk/viewtopic.php?p=7389&highlight=step+1689#7389

~/archiben

Re: 13 of 12

Stephen Dolbee — Tue, 17 Feb 2004 15:41:34 GMT

All the time-even in earlier versions. I don't know why, but it doesn't seem to matter.

Steve

Re: 13 of 12

Djordje — Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:46:04 GMT

Stephen wrote:
All the time-even in earlier versions. I don't know why, but it doesn't seem to matter.

My favourite is "Phase 134556 of 11" ... happened in the last version of AV Works rendering plugin.

If a counter does not work, remove it.

Re: 13 of 12

stefan — Wed, 18 Feb 2004 08:32:23 GMT

I had posted this as a bug and they declared it as such, but (obviously) not of a high priority. It is a bit strange, but it doesn't break anything, so they better devote time to more interesting bugs.

Re: 13 of 12

Anonymous — Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:46:23 GMT

This is like when ArchiCAD tells me it will take 365,237 minutes (they can't show hours?) to complete a rendering that is actually finished in about 2 minutes. Of course we need to understand that this is a fundamental problem with computers. Alan Turing proved that it is impossible to predict (with mathematical certainty) whether a program will complete at all, let alone how long it will take. The best the programmers can do is to collect some information along the way and use it to guess at the duration of the process.

The step 13 of 12 problem would probably just be fixed by something to the effect of:

IF step > no_steps THEN step = no_steps

Like much of life, it doesn't actually make the report any more accurate. It just makes it appear more accurate, which may actually be the same thing.

Re: 13 of 12

stefan — Wed, 18 Feb 2004 13:01:54 GMT

I thought this was because of some un-initialized integer, which could lead to such big and strange numbers.

They would probably be better of displaying "when it's finished" for the first n seconds.

Most rendering software doesn't try to predict render time at all. They just count from zero. I never heard someone complain. A percentage (e.g. the amount of rendered lines) would also be a good indication and always accurate. Not every line will render at the same speed, as you may know.

Re: 13 of 12

Stephen Dolbee — Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:08:22 GMT

I think it should just play the Jeopardy theme song until it's finished.

Re: 13 of 12

__archiben — Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:15:56 GMT

here's one for you . . .

. . . but i was messing around with rough-around-the-edges special menu things!

~/archiben