Re: Checker results not as expected GCA0HZW

https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCA0HZW/72367

The above checker has a criteria for 20 finds in 75 Victorian counties, however some of the results appear to be not as expected.

In the case of cacher "Riddell" the following 4 counties do not show in the results (ie they fail), however the find count for this cacher would suggest that it passes:
- Australia-Victoria-Baw Baw (69)
- Australia-Victoria-Greater Dandenong (48)
- Australia-Victoria-Latrobe (Victoria) (81)
- Australia-Victoria-West Wimmera (21)

Also in the case of cacher "Riddell" the following 3 counties are showing as passed, however the find counts are below the required level of 20:
- Australia-Victoria-Bass Coast (11)
- Australia-Victoria-Moira (15)
- Australia-Victoria-Yarriambiack (12)

a similar checker using different criteria indicates the finds of each county as follows: https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC94WXD/57831

Thanks
Andrew

I would have used a different script for this request
Here is a checker https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCA0HZW/72373

I believe Húgh did not set the setcount in the config of his checker

New checker works well thank you.

Could we just update the format of the results when the cacher fails the test (the LGA's list in one continuous string without spaces vs the pass which lists each LGA per line).

Not essential but A-Z vs Z-A would be amazing for both pass and fail results.

So fast and awesome work thank you.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2022 02:02PM by RoamingHowie. (view changes)

I can't change the output but maybe sumbloke can adjust output

@sumbloke - can you attend to this adjustment

Sorry, missed this for a while. Script has been adjusted.

Thank you

Is there a different checker as this one https://project-gc.com/Challenges/GCA0HZW/72373 doesn't show the updates?

Many thanks
Andrew

Whoops, didn't save properly. Try again now.

Brilliant! Thank you

Oops. I have removed my old checker.