-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 362
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
Do not ask for surface of complicated roads (which already have surface:lanes* taged) #5453
Conversation
Compiles and seems to work fine, e.g. way 39159525 with |
From #5330 (comment)
What about the first part? |
Um, perhaps I'm not getting what you meant there completely, but surface quest does not show at all when the way has Or to rephrase: Or have I misunderstood what you meant there? 😕 Footnotes
|
Why should it not show at all? The filter is (extract):
So, it still shows when |
Ops, you're correct, those should've been under Why tests didn't catch itAlso, while scratching my head why my test of: @Test fun `not applicable to tagged surface:lanes`() {
assertIsNotApplicable("highway" to "residential", "surface:lanes" to "concrete|asphalt|asphalt") did not catch that error (i.e. matched I've also had to increase memory for tests to be run, details in PR #5457 I've provided new build at https://github.com/mnalis/StreetComplete/actions/runs/7651486933 and test on https://github.com/mnalis/StreetComplete/actions/runs/7651409738. |
There continues to be a misunderstanding. I wrote
In other words, DO ask about missing |
OK, I can do that (ask surface quest regardless of any
Which seems to me to say that quest should be skipped if
I can try to do that if you wish it so (although it seems to be problematic if the way has already tagged e.g. I think I found it should be checked here: Lines 9 to 14 in f8976a9
But I am at loss how I can access all the other tags (like |
Did you do a typo there? That expression doesn't make sense to me. It should be skipped if Or, yet in other words, the presence of
Yes, in that case they'd have to leave a note. This is a situation that is extremely rare enough that it is fine to leave a note in that case.
Well, your code before my first review was a good start, the only thing that was completely missing was the one thing I noted. It looks to me you should just first revert the commits "never asks surface quest when surface:lanes* is present" and "really always skip surface:lanes*" and continue from there. |
StreetComplete/app/src/main/java/de/westnordost/streetcomplete/quests/surface/AddRoadSurfaceForm.kt Line 20 in f8976a9
^- here you can access the element tags via element.tags and hence check for any surface lanes before you call "collectSurfaceDescriptionIfNecessary". Not sure where the code is for the surface overlay, I guess the check needs to be added there too. so best put the |
This reverts commit 5aa1ff3. as asked in streetcomplete#5453 (comment)
I see you made some changes. Is it deliberate that it is still marked as draft? |
On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 02:42:15PM -0800, Tobias Zwick wrote:
I see you made some changes. Is it deliberate that it is still marked as draft?
Yes, still needs changes.
|
…licting tracktype
> Task :app:testDebugUnitTest de.westnordost.streetcomplete.quests.surface.AddRoadSurfaceTest > applicable to tagged complex surface lanes with specific surface tag FAILED java.lang.AssertionError at AddRoadSurfaceTest.kt:76 see https://github.com/mnalis/StreetComplete/actions/runs/8072071853/job/22053071582#step:5:467
previous one was disallowing ever pressing "OK" to select surface, and not just avoiding surface:note
(from AddCrossingForm.kt)
Well I think I found where overlay asks for surface note, it seems to be here However, trying to access |
I've seen your barrage of commits yesterday (I get a notification email for each of them) and suspected that you were struggling. Am I right to assume that you are creating a PR without actually having Android Studio or a comparable IDE installed? Please, don't. You are not only massively wasting your own time by incapacitating yourself through absent tooling, you are wasting time of people who then help you. It is no secret that for many PRs of contributors reviewed, I spent more time reviewing, explaining and helping that I would have just implementing it myself. And that's okay, but the expectation is that contributors sharpen their tools and learn from that. It looks to me as if yesterday you massively wasted your time playing ping pong with the Github build job, in that time you could have installed and learned basic use of Android Studio ten times. In any proper IDE, you can easily navigate through the code, between the classes, inheritors, superclasses, what is called by whom, what methods are available in So, look, you are one of the top contributors by number of commits. The suggestion that you apparently contributed these with no tooling shocks me because it means you have been massively wasting your time (all along). What I am suggesting is, that you should rather take a few steps back and learn how to help yourself - or rather, learn how the IDE can help you. Regarding your particular issue, it looks like you should pass the information whether the element has |
AddRoadSurface.kt
- do not ask forsurface
when more detailedsurface:lanes*
is already presentsurface:lanes*
as BLACK, same as ways withsurface:note
Supports tags
surface:lanes
,surface:lanes:forward
,surface:lanes:backward
,surface:lanes:both_lanes
Fixes #5330