-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 344
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update Estimated Printing Time Logic #3360
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Also would be nice to see the "first layer" time. PS does this and it is useful. |
Will be nice to see your contribution, thanks! |
+1 for these patch. I think they can be merged. Thank you very much for contribution! @iZonex |
thanks for doing this |
lanewei120
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 19, 2024
/Users/ci.slave/slicer/patch_build/1/bamboo_slicer/src/libslic3r/GCode/GCodeProcessor.cpp:486:33: error: cannot pass non-trivial object of type 'std::string' (aka 'basic_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char>>') to variadic function; expected type from format string was 'char *' [-Wnon-pod-varargs] get_time_dhms(machine.time)); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ github pull request: #3360 Change-Id: If13ee145b20ef9532b23a58bb3b0a29f30d8c0a8 Change-Id: I98fd87417c432c3afae67a3d2bc29c79f8bffa3c
hadess
pushed a commit
to hadess/BambuStudio
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 22, 2024
/Users/ci.slave/slicer/patch_build/1/bamboo_slicer/src/libslic3r/GCode/GCodeProcessor.cpp:486:33: error: cannot pass non-trivial object of type 'std::string' (aka 'basic_string<char, char_traits<char>, allocator<char>>') to variadic function; expected type from format string was 'char *' [-Wnon-pod-varargs] get_time_dhms(machine.time)); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ github pull request: bambulab#3360 Change-Id: If13ee145b20ef9532b23a58bb3b0a29f30d8c0a8 Change-Id: I98fd87417c432c3afae67a3d2bc29c79f8bffa3c
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This PR introduces changes to the logic used for calculating and displaying the estimated printing time in our printing software. It specifically adds a conditional check to distinguish between BBL and non-BBL printers, affecting how the estimated printing time is displayed.
Changes Made
Conditional Check for BBL Printers: Implemented a check to determine if the printer is a BBL printer using
if (!print.is_BBL_Printer())
. This allows for different handling of estimated printing times based on the printer type.Separate Handling for Estimated Printing Time:
Rationale
This change is important to provide accurate and relevant printing time estimates tailored to the type of printer being used. Differentiating between BBL and non-BBL printers allows us to display the most relevant information to the user, enhancing the usability and accuracy of the software.
Testing
The changes have been tested in various scenarios to ensure that:
Request for Review
I request the reviewers to focus on: