See a post earlier in this thread, and the thread entitled One man's indexes are another man's indices... (in which you have posted).JacobH wrote:(But indexes not indices?).
I will investigate this evening.JacobH wrote:I am not sure if this is a new errorjdaw1 wrote:Quite possibly new errors have been introduced.
Looks good to me. Thanks!jdaw1 wrote:That problem believed now fixed. Please report other errors in this thread.
A major upgrade which might be quite nice would be to fish out the LBVs, Crusteds, Colheitas and Garrafeiras (do we have any Garrafeira tasting notes?) into separate date-ordered categories, though I'm not sure how much work this would be to do.DRT wrote:Could this be "Niepoort Crusted: 18 Dec 2010"?
Hmm...I’ve been looking at the back-up of the spreadsheet which you sent me some time ago but can’t quite figure out where this bug lies: is it in pulling out the vintage, shipper and type from the thread title or generating the lists for publication?jdaw1 wrote:Jacob: I am always have troubles with incomplete calculations. That’s because I am doing this in a spreadsheet.
The spreadsheet is laid out as various tables, in a manner resembling the tables of a relational database. It is how I build spreadsheets. Would it be sensible for Head Productions to en-database this spreadsheet?
there is a logo followed by the link "ThePortForum.com" in the top left corner. The only exceptions to this are the alphabetically and numerically sorted TN Index pages, which have the logo as the link instead of the words. Can this be fixed on the index pages, please, so that we have consistency? Excellent news! I was looking for something from the last Christmas offline a few days ago - good to know it will be easier to find now. Thanks for doing the update.DRT wrote:The TN Index has been updated to include all TN's posted up to 14 Feb 2012.
If you spot any errors please let me know here.
For some reason my Cruz 2002 LBV note hasn't carried across. Did I put it down incorrectly?DRT wrote:The TN Index has been updated to include all TN's posted up to 14 Feb 2012.
If you spot any errors please let me know here.
Oh. I was waiting on our President of General Genius to rescue us.DRT wrote:I am waiting on our Vice President of Automagical Technology Solutions producing a version of the program that creates the TN index in fewer than 14 hours processing time. Hopefully once we have that we can find out why that one, and probably others, was missed.
Perhaps our Non-executive Director of Whizbangalogical Inventions could help?jdaw1 wrote:Oh. I was waiting on our President of General Genius to rescue us.DRT wrote:I am waiting on our Vice President of Automagical Technology Solutions producing a version of the program that creates the TN index in fewer than 14 hours processing time. Hopefully once we have that we can find out why that one, and probably others, was missed.
A better idea than leaving it to the court jester.DRT wrote:Perhaps our Non-executive Director of Whizbangalogical Inventions could help?jdaw1 wrote:Oh. I was waiting on our President of General Genius to rescue us.DRT wrote:I am waiting on our Vice President of Automagical Technology Solutions producing a version of the program that creates the TN index in fewer than 14 hours processing time. Hopefully once we have that we can find out why that one, and probably others, was missed.
I tried hitting it with my tickle stick but it didn't workjdaw1 wrote:A better idea than leaving it to the court jester.DRT wrote:Perhaps our Non-executive Director of Whizbangalogical Inventions could help?jdaw1 wrote:Oh. I was waiting on our President of General Genius to rescue us.DRT wrote:I am waiting on our Vice President of Automagical Technology Solutions producing a version of the program that creates the TN index in fewer than 14 hours processing time. Hopefully once we have that we can find out why that one, and probably others, was missed.
I'd be happy to take a look and see if I can contribute anything useful (perhaps depending on the program language) if someone wants to point me at it (or email it)?DRT wrote:Perhaps our Non-executive Director of Whizbangalogical Inventions could help?
JGH has created a prototype to which the helpful feedback from both JDAW and DRT was "Well done. Carry on". He appears to have things in hand but will no doubt seek assistance if required. Thank you for offering assistancePhilW wrote:I'd be happy to take a look and see if I can contribute anything useful (perhaps depending on the program language) if someone wants to point me at it (or email it)?DRT wrote:Perhaps our Non-executive Director of Whizbangalogical Inventions could help?
Same here. I LOVE 1970 Fonseca! I had decided to buy enough 1994 Vesuvio to open a bottle a month for the rest if my life. Hopefully I do not have nearly enough.AHB wrote: Absolutely nothing. I think there is a certain stylish decadence to opening a bottle of Fonseca 1970 once a month for the last 6 months. I doff my hat in admiration (and a little envy).
Hmm...I can’t work this one out at all, I’m afraid. The problem seems to be that it is being sorting alphabetically by the thread’s number rather than numerically. To give an example, the threads for the Vesuvio 1990 have the numbers 195, 974, 1650, 2290 and 3666 but are being sorted as: 1650, 195, 2290, 3666, 974 because it’s comparing the numbers digit by digit rather than overall. I will have to carry on playing with it and seeing what I can do.griff wrote:Looks good. I note that some of the notes are no longer chronological e.g. Cockburn 63 and Dow 75 VP. Is it able to be arranged?
That suggests that the thread numbers are being treated as text strings rather than numbers.JacobH wrote:Hmm...I can’t work this one out at all, I’m afraid. The problem seems to be that it is being sorting alphabetically by the thread’s number rather than numerically. To give an example, the threads for the Vesuvio 1990 have the numbers 195, 974, 1650, 2290 and 3666 but are being sorted as: 1650, 195, 2290, 3666, 974 because it’s comparing the numbers digit by digit rather than overall. I will have to carry on playing with it and seeing what I can do.griff wrote:Looks good. I note that some of the notes are no longer chronological e.g. Cockburn 63 and Dow 75 VP. Is it able to be arranged?
Yes, which is odd, because I thought perl only had one variable type and so this shouldn’t arise. It looks like it’s not being sorted by the bit of code that I’ve added to do the sorting, so I’ll have to look some more.DRT wrote:That suggests that the thread numbers are being treated as text strings rather than numbers.JacobH wrote:Hmm...I can’t work this one out at all, I’m afraid. The problem seems to be that it is being sorting alphabetically by the thread’s number rather than numerically. To give an example, the threads for the Vesuvio 1990 have the numbers 195, 974, 1650, 2290 and 3666 but are being sorted as: 1650, 195, 2290, 3666, 974 because it’s comparing the numbers digit by digit rather than overall. I will have to carry on playing with it and seeing what I can do.griff wrote:Looks good. I note that some of the notes are no longer chronological e.g. Cockburn 63 and Dow 75 VP. Is it able to be arranged?
I’m glad I was not the only person to have thought of this rather inelegant way of dealing with the problem. Let’s just hope none of the real programmers on the forum read thisjdaw1 wrote:Can it be prefixed with 0s, compelling each to be (say) six digits?
Code: Select all
1970 15 Feb 2008 N70
25 May 2008
AHB 23 Sep 2008
23 Nov 2008
26 Jan 2009
AHB 18 Nov 2009
9 Feb 2010
AHB 16 Jul 2010
26 Jul 2010
11 Sep 2010
THRA 25 Sep 2007
Now uploaded. Thanks, JacobJacobH wrote:I’ve fixed it now and sent the files to DRT for uploading.
I have just checked again and there is no doubt that I am correct...the link for the N'70 AHB 08 Oct 2010 goes to a D'70JacobH wrote:Hmm...I’m afraid can’t see the mis-placed Noval 1970. Having checked all of the AHB 8 Oct 2010 Tasting Notes in the alphabetical index (of which there are quite a few), they seem to be going to the right places. There doesn’t seem to be a tasting note for Noval 1970 listed with that date:Would there be any chance you could copy-and-paste the section of the page where it appears, because I think I’m doing something stupid? Thanks!Code: Select all
1970 15 Feb 2008 N70 25 May 2008 AHB 23 Sep 2008 23 Nov 2008 26 Jan 2009 AHB 18 Nov 2009 9 Feb 2010 AHB 16 Jul 2010 26 Jul 2010 11 Sep 2010 THRA 25 Sep 2007
PEBKACDRT wrote:Error Code 00001 (user error)
and have sent the files to DRT. That’s a bug. There is a test for ‟Scion” which assigns it as 1855 Taylor Colheita, but that’s only run after the final catch-all test which assumes that anything in the format ‟YYYY Shipper” is a Vintage Port. I’ll sort that out.AHB wrote:(1) Scion is showing as Taylor 1855 vintage port - should I amend the title in some way to get this to show as "Taylor's Scion" and as a colheita or tawny?
Well spotted. The links aren’t (yet) generated automatically, so I’ll have to hand-add them.AHB wrote:(2) On the vintage organised list, the big table of a list of years (which contains hyperlinks to the tasting notes of that year) has not been updated for a while. There are now some years which have tasting notes but no link.
Some time ago, jdaw1 set things up so that if he or DRT were the first posters on a thread then their initials did not show up (since often they would generate the threads after a big tasting even if they weren’t there). I’ve carried on that system, though I’m happy to replace DRT and jdaw1’s initials if that is the preference.AHB wrote:(3) I like the coloured band showing whether a group of wines are VP, colheita or garrafeira - but why do some tasting notes show who posted them and some do not show this?
Now uploaded.JacobH wrote:I have forwarded new versions to DRT (using the same data) which correct those bugs and also a few others (like some independent quintas whose VP was being described as SQVP).