Wicklow 200 done and dusted

blorg

They are putting the split times up later this week (said it already but bears repeating as no-one seems to have noticed given the replies posted!)

cantalach

@daymobrew - the attached as requested is a one line version of the workbook I posted yesterday. I used row 6 as the sample row because it was the first to have both a start time and a finish time. One thing to note is that the workbook on the W200 site is in an older Excel format but I have saved this one in the 2003 format.

@everyone - daymobrew needs this to report a bug to the OpenOffice people. Apologies for doing this via a public post but I can't get it to him by PM because that doesn't support attachments.

kenmc

Lads I dunno what this bug you're talking about is. There's no bug that I can see.
In the 'one line' spreadsheet the values in the Start time and stop time are strings, not dates. They start with the single apostrophe representing text. You cannot expect to subtract two strings and get a meaningful time from them - you just get 0, which if you convert that to a time is 12:00:00 am, or if you leave the am/pm formatting out you get 00:00:00
If you remove that, then it is in a date format and can be subtracted simply.... Compare B3 with B5 in this attachment

Raam

This thread appears to have moved on from talking about the Wicklow 200

kenmc

yeah but it took over 160 posts though, so it's time to move on

TinyExplosions

You're all such geeks! with your Open Office, and Linux and stuff... :cool:

blorg

TinyExplosions wrote: »

You're all such geeks! with your Open Office, and Linux and stuff... :cool:

Welcome to the internet. BTW if you think those are geeky, you forgot daymo's entirely gratuitous use of Perl.

cantalach

kenmc wrote: »

Lads I dunno what this bug you're talking about is. There's no bug that I can see.
In the 'one line' spreadsheet the values in the Start time and stop time are strings, not dates. They start with the single apostrophe representing text. You cannot expect to subtract two strings and get a meaningful time from them - you just get 0, which if you convert that to a time is 12:00:00 am, or if you leave the am/pm formatting out you get 00:00:00
If you remove that, then it is in a date format and can be subtracted simply.... Compare B3 with B5 in this attachment

I'm not suggesting at all that there is a bug in Excel, and I don't think daymobrew is either. He's just trying to work out why OpenOffice can't do what Excel seems to be able to do.

For the record though, Excel 2003 can actually subtract two strings, provided it can implicitly convert the string to a type that supports arithmetic. The easiest way to demonstrate this is to put strings containing numbers into A1 and B1 and then enter a formula like "=A1-B1" into C1. You'll see that it converts and subtracts automagically.

TinyExplosions

blorg wrote: »

Welcome to the internet. BTW if you think those are geeky, you forgot daymo's entirely gratuitous use of Perl.

It wasn't gratuitous, it was necessary

kenmc

cantalach wrote: »

I'm not suggesting at all that there is a bug in Excel, and I don't think daymobrew is either. He's just trying to work out why OpenOffice can't do what Excel seems to be able to do.

For the record though, Excel 2003 can actually subtract two strings, provided it can implicitly convert the string to a type that supports arithmetic. The easiest way to demonstrate this is to put strings containing numbers into A1 and B1 and then enter a formula like "=A1-B1" into C1. You'll see that it converts and subtracts automagically.

Ah yes I see that that works, although I would propose that the OO.o implementation is actually 'more correct' than the Excel one, and that they probably decided that it should be so, in that it doesn't try to second guess things.
Standards should be followed and rules kept, otherwise if you add a "but what if" then you'll need to add a "but what if else" to the "what if" and you end up with the way Internet Exploder displays broken pages 'correctly' meaning that people can be lazy programmers and get away with it ... for a while.

daymobrew

TinyExplosions wrote: »

It wasn't gratuitous, it was necessary

Exactly! At least someone noticed the difference.

kenmc wrote:

Standards should be followed and rules kept, otherwise if you add a "but what if" then you'll need to add a "but what if else" to the "what if" and you end up with the way Internet Exploder displays broken pages 'correctly' meaning that people can be lazy programmers and get away with it ... for a while.

I see this laziness in my day job - Linux programmers using gcc get away with stuff that the Solaris compiler won't allow e.g. returning values from a void function.

Hungrycol

Alsolutely no reason for this post other than to get the amount of replies to 200 It is a W200 post after all.

trek climber

Hungrycol wrote: »

Alsolutely no reason for this post other than to get the amount of replies to 200 It is a W200 post after all.

done my bit - only 6 left now !!!!

blorg

Another Boards Jersey

trek climber

blorg wrote: »

Another Boards Jersey

Me again from my good side - I'm famous !!!!!!!!!!!

Raam

http://www.wicklow200.ie/gallery/2008jonw/PICT0035
There's me in the white, stuffing my face. RogerB is pulling some weird face just behind me.

daymobrew

I didn't pick my jersey up until a week after the event, but attached is a photo of me with my 6month old son squeezed into the mini-jersey.

Chips Lovell

That's a very cute picture.

Raam

el tonto wrote: »

That's a very cute picture.

You are referring to Roger and me, right?

Chips Lovell

Raam wrote: »

You are referring to Roger and me, right?

Yes. I go weak at the knees every time I see ye.

Caroline_ie

daymobrew wrote: »

I didn't pick my jersey up until a week after the event, but attached is a photo of me with my 6month old son squeezed into the mini-jersey.

So adorable (the baby ) not any of you hairy lads

Hungrycol

That's a brillant pic Daymo. Well done sir

bobtjustice

daymobrew wrote: »

I didn't pick my jersey up until a week after the event, but attached is a photo of me with my 6month old son squeezed into the mini-jersey.

Ha ha .... excellent photo!

Gavin

That child is very happy !

daymobrew

Verb wrote: »

That child is very happy !

He has my good looks, of course he's happy

TinyExplosions

daymobrew wrote: »

He has my good looks, of course he's happy

That's cos the jersey's so tight he can't breathe!

daymobrew

TinyExplosions wrote: »

That's cos the jersey's so tight he can't breathe!

He's screaming to be let out of it. "Ok, I smiled for your damn photo dad, now get me the hell out of this"

kincsem

blorg wrote: »

They are putting the split times up later this week (said it already but bears repeating as no-one seems to have noticed given the replies posted!)

It is ten days since they promised to put the intermediate times on the Wicklow 200 site "in the next few days".
I asked the question this afternoon on the Wicklow 200 site - "Any progress with the intermediate times ?"
There were 1,475 entries this year.