Re: ITL status

[abdulhaq <al-arabeyes at alinsyria dot fsnet dot co dot uk>]

It sounds excellent, jazaakallahu khairan. Hopefully this means that I can 
release a new version of kprayertime over the w/end inshaa'allaah.

wassalaam
abdulhaq


On Tuesday 13 July 2004 19:43, Thamer Mahmoud wrote:
>
> All major changes that were planned for the ITL 0.6 release have
> already landed on CVS. The only thing left is a small update to add
> "Location.pressure" and "Location.temperature". This "final" update
> will happen in the next two days Inshallah. I'm done coding this but
> I still havn't done any testing with the new code.
>
> Nadim, is the plan to move (ipraytime, ical, idate) to their own
> folder and make process still on? If you want to do this, now is a
> good time ;-). If you don't, just give your thoughts/suggestion on how
> to proceed with this and I'll do it later (after updating libprayer).
>
>  > Also, I asked the developer of libnova if it used VSOP87 for the
>  > sunrise/sunset calculations and he said that it did. He also felt that
>  > due to atmospheric refraction the times would only be accurate to about
>  > 20 seconds or so.
>  >
>  > wassalaam
>  > abdulhaq
>
> If your intention is to test against libnova or other astronomy
> software, I'd suggest you use what's currently on CVS rather than
> waiting for the next update. The next update will introduce a couple
> of Earth specific changes that might not be available (or activated by
> default) in most of these astronomy tools. Also remember to disable
> atmospheric refraction by setting the atmospheric pressure value to
> zero (until we add support for this in the ITL's libprayer).
>
> As for my own "extensive but not exhaustive" testing, so far so good
>
> :-). Tests were performed against NASA's ephemeris generator [1] and
>
> we're getting the same exact hours and minutes (with similar setup
> and with proper rounding changes to ITL). I will be doing some more
> tests just to be sure that all settings of the ephemeris generator
> are being setup correctly and optimized for accuracy as much as
> possible.
>
> For testing the seconds value, I compared results with the "Sky Map
> Pro" results posted on this article [2] and a few other tools, which I
> don't have links to at the moment. Anyways, the difference never
> exceeded a plus or minus 1 second for sunrise and sunset.
>
> [1] http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/eph
> [2] http://www.xylem.f2s.com/kepler/moonrise.html
>
>
> Salaam,
>
> Thamer Mahmoud
> _______________________________________________
> General mailing list
> General at arabeyes dot org
> http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general