ruote log_2010-11-18

2010-11-18 00:52:31 utc jmettraux maybe something like https://gist.github.com/704464
2010-11-18 00:52:31 utc hassox so... the last piece of this puzzle for me is how do I test a 'wait "5m"
2010-11-18 00:52:49 utc hassox ohhh lovely
2010-11-18 00:52:50 utc jmettraux without actually waiting 5 minutes...
2010-11-18 00:52:55 utc hassox yeah ;)
2010-11-18 00:53:24 utc jmettraux let me look some things up
2010-11-18 00:55:46 utc jmettraux ok, cooking a gist
2010-11-18 00:55:58 utc hassox you are a champion!
2010-11-18 00:56:23 utc jmettraux well... you're the champion for unraveling all of this
2010-11-18 00:56:39 utc jmettraux (don't know if this english makes sense)
2010-11-18 01:07:01 utc jmettraux hassox: https://gist.github.com/704476
2010-11-18 01:07:51 utc hassox champ :D
2010-11-18 01:07:53 utc jmettraux it grabs the waiting expression and forces a reply on it
2010-11-18 01:07:54 utc hassox I'll give it a try
2010-11-18 01:09:33 utc hassox jmettraux: will that work with a concurrent setup?
2010-11-18 01:09:39 utc hassox lemme show you my full definition
2010-11-18 01:11:42 utc hassox pm'ing
2010-11-18 01:12:07 utc hassox I guess ther'es not much proprietry in it
2010-11-18 01:12:18 utc hassox but I just wanna be careful
2010-11-18 01:12:22 utc jmettraux understood
2010-11-18 01:13:47 utc jmettraux could one of the calculate_ overflow ? Like, take longer than 55m or 30m ?
2010-11-18 01:14:01 utc hassox no
2010-11-18 01:14:05 utc hassox they're done in a few seconds
2010-11-18 01:15:04 utc jmettraux what about chaining them in a sequence, without any "wait" ?
2010-11-18 01:16:12 utc hassox if i do it with the concurrence the the timing will be correct to the second yeah?
2010-11-18 01:16:23 utc hassox it's important to start it at the right time
2010-11-18 01:16:32 utc jmettraux aaah, understood
2010-11-18 01:33:44 utc hassox will paste in her
2010-11-18 01:33:45 utc jmettraux https://github.com/jmettraux/ruote/blob/ruote2.1/lib/ruote/receiver/base.rb#L70-75 the "wrong number of args occurs here"
2010-11-18 01:33:46 utc hassox e
2010-11-18 01:33:53 utc jmettraux no need ;-)
2010-11-18 01:34:14 utc hassox wtf
2010-11-18 01:34:41 utc jmettraux yeah, indeed
2010-11-18 01:34:57 utc hassox hrm
2010-11-18 01:35:29 utc jmettraux this looks all vanilla
2010-11-18 01:35:59 utc hassox wonder if it's DM && AS fighting :\
2010-11-18 01:36:09 utc jmettraux ouch
2010-11-18 01:36:19 utc jmettraux put_msg issue ?
2010-11-18 01:36:50 utc hassox pasted the stack trace to you
2010-11-18 01:37:00 utc jmettraux great
2010-11-18 01:37:31 utc jmettraux oh, the evil json 1.2.3
2010-11-18 01:37:48 utc hassox oh?
2010-11-18 01:37:51 utc hassox I need a new version?
2010-11-18 01:38:24 utc jmettraux always using yajl-ruby
2010-11-18 01:38:29 utc jmettraux I remember there was an issue with json
2010-11-18 01:38:36 utc hassox kk
2010-11-18 01:38:39 utc hassox lemme switch
2010-11-18 01:39:23 utc jmettraux json is at version 1.4.6 now (whoah time flies)
2010-11-18 01:40:30 utc hassox hhe
2010-11-18 01:41:17 utc hassox that fixed it
2010-11-18 01:41:24 utc hassox damn that was obscure :\
2010-11-18 01:41:51 utc jmettraux great
2010-11-18 01:42:06 utc jmettraux backtraces ftw
2010-11-18 01:42:50 utc hassox :)
2010-11-18 02:13:30 utc hassox jmettraux: sorry... still not quite there :(
2010-11-18 02:14:04 utc hassox https://gist.github.com/053c72a0a8ef78f1b6c4
2010-11-18 02:14:23 utc hassox I did what you suggested by replying to the engine... but it doesn't seem to kick it foward to the catchall participant
2010-11-18 02:14:57 utc jmettraux this "#{MarketWorkflows.close_plus(close_time, 5.minutes)}s" is interpreted at definition time
2010-11-18 02:15:02 utc jmettraux ie when the ruby code is seen
2010-11-18 02:15:11 utc hassox yup
2010-11-18 02:15:14 utc jmettraux ok
2010-11-18 02:15:28 utc hassox I want it snapshotted at the time the defn is created
2010-11-18 02:15:35 utc jmettraux understood
2010-11-18 02:16:00 utc jmettraux are you waiting a bit before the forced reply to the wait and the pooling of the catchall participant ?
2010-11-18 02:16:01 utc hassox but where is the
2010-11-18 02:16:06 utc hassox yeah
2010-11-18 02:16:11 utc hassox I'm doing it in the debugger
2010-11-18 02:16:14 utc hassox so it's waiting heaps
2010-11-18 02:16:45 utc jmettraux ok
2010-11-18 02:17:17 utc jmettraux so the symptom is "after the forced reply, the flow doesn't reach the next participant" ?
2010-11-18 02:17:26 utc hassox correct
2010-11-18 02:17:40 utc hassox I'm not sure if that schedule in the status dump is showing that
2010-11-18 02:18:00 utc hassox I don't see the force_pending_calculations participant anywhere in that
2010-11-18 02:18:09 utc hassox o.O
2010-11-18 02:18:14 utc hassox jmettraux: nevermind me
2010-11-18 02:18:20 utc jmettraux the gist you've shown... the wait is still in there
2010-11-18 02:18:29 utc jmettraux force reply fail ?
2010-11-18 02:18:33 utc hassox it seems that the workflow doesn't work properly in the debugger
2010-11-18 02:18:38 utc jmettraux ouch
2010-11-18 02:18:44 utc hassox ACTION just took the debugger out, and let it move and it went through :\
2010-11-18 02:18:52 utc hassox lots of little things ;)
2010-11-18 02:19:00 utc hassox sorry to keep bugging you dude
2010-11-18 02:19:05 utc jmettraux no worries
2010-11-18 02:19:13 utc jmettraux learning a lot
2010-11-18 02:24:49 utc hassox jmettraux: I have the green dot!
2010-11-18 02:25:00 utc jmettraux woot !
2010-11-18 02:25:10 utc jmettraux and I have lunch !
2010-11-18 02:25:14 utc hassox thanx heaps
2010-11-18 02:25:30 utc jmettraux you're welcome !
2010-11-18 13:57:15 utc jmettraux peisanen: hello and welcome to #ruote