Obsolete attribute

Re: Obsolete attribute

PattuX — Thu, 04 Jun 2020 00:27:43 +0000

https://coord.info/GCJDGM

This one also has the cactii attrubute set but also has four blanks. The API returns dangerous animals (18) correctly, but also thorns (39), which is not set according to the website. Idk whether cactii is returned obviously, since you filter it. Any idea why (1) you didn't catch this one when searching for this attibute, (2) why thorns is returned but not displayed, and (3) what the blanks might be?

Re: Obsolete attribute

magma1447 — Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:45:51 +0000

ID 16 seems to be the only ID missing in my table attributes. All in that table are used.

Re: Obsolete attribute

jpavlik — Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:41:42 +0000

I made a test, now the cache GC684 returns attributes_set_1=0x8d204083, so the bit 16 is not set.
Are there other obsolete attributes? Please check it and filter it.
I think that the solution of filter the invalid attributes is valid. It has no sense to create new icon for attribute that is not visualized in listing and is set in only one active cache.

thank you for fixing this problem

Re: Obsolete attribute

magma1447 — Mon, 25 Nov 2019 09:28:09 +0000

A combination of notes to self, and presenting some facts...

The GCCOM API has a method to get all attributes. The attribute Cactus (id 16) exists according to the API.
There seems to be four geocaches in the world with this attribute.
GC684, GC19X08, GC1BHCR, GC1BXH4

Only the first isn't archived, the other three are. There is no working image at Geocaching.com either.

It doesn't seem like it's ever "unset".

Since we haven't seem this before, my guess is that something has changed at Geocaching.com. They probably never exposed that geocaches had that attribute before, but now it does.

It doesn't seem like the attribute should exist, so I do not want to add it into my database table of attributes that exists, and I don't want to add it into the API method to get all attributes available.

Since it's not affecting anything on the web, I prefer to not ignore the attribute when writing cache data to the database. Until it disturbs more, it can exist there.

What seems reasonable to me, is that I will do an AND on the attributes when fetching them from the database in the LUA callback. That way the LUA Sandbox will never see attribute 16 set.
$fields['attributes_set_1'] = 'c.attributes_set_1 & 9223372036854743039'; // Remove attribute 16 (Cactus)

I have made this patch and released to Live servers. I have not tested it. Do you mind doing that?

Obsolete attribute

jpavlik — Sun, 24 Nov 2019 20:46:31 +0000

There are few caches that has attribute that is not defined in the array returned from PGC.GetAttributeList()
At least this cache https://coord.info/GC684 has attribute 16 (cactii nearby - what hell it was?).
My script crached for the users that founds this cache.
There are a couple of solutions:

after getting attribute list add to the array the missing attributes
wait until Magnus updates the getAttributeList
ignore any attribute that is not present in the array, something like

attrlist=PGC.GetAttributeList()
...
if attrlist[attr_index] then
  do something
  i.e. PGC.print(attrlist[attr_index].attributeName)
else
  ignore the attribute
end