I think that it is in a different time zone, not mine (GMT+2 normally, +3 summer time). I also think I have this problem since a few beta's ago, a.k.a it didn't started with the latest.
Does anyone else have it?
Inactive, due to life changes. Send me a PM for any question.
I assume you're talking about the Time column in the about dialog. That is actually the amount of time since Rainmeter was started.
GitHub | DeviantArt | Tumblr
This is the song that never ends. It just goes on and on my friends. Some people started singing it not knowing what it was, and they'll continue singing it forever just because . . .
I had the biggest coincidence happening to me before I post this screenshot. The time said 23:40, and then I restarted Rainmeter (due to irrelevant reasons), and I took the shot. It looked as the day changed (from 23:00 to 00:00).
Ok then, thank you, and sorry for my dumbness. It would be nice if we could have the actual time of the notification there, so that we can know when something happened.
Inactive, due to life changes. Send me a PM for any question.
I had the biggest coincidence happening to me before I post this screenshot. The time said 23:40, and then I restarted Rainmeter (due to irrelevant reasons), and I took the shot. It looked as the day changed (from 23:00 to 00:00).
Ok then, thank you, and sorry for my dumbness. It would be nice if we could have the actual time of the notification there, so that we can know when something happened.
We were just talking about that, but feel that for debugging purposes, it is a better approach to have the "elapsed time" as it is, since that can support a level of detail down to the millisecond, which any variant of "clock time" won't.
jsmorley wrote:
We were just talking about that, but feel that for debugging purposes, it is a better approach to have the "elapsed time" as it is, since that can support a level of detail down to the millisecond, which any variant of "clock time" won't.
Just saw your answer.
If the "clock time" variant restricts the detail level to seconds only, then yeah, I agree with that approach. knowing the exact sequence of the errors helps greatly when programming.
What I had in mind when proposing the "clock", is that many times I open up my log for irrelevant reasons to see that I have some minor errors (not conflicting with the use of the skin; sometimes it is connection failure, while others a hiccup in a .lua script) and I don't really know when they happen. That fact hinders my attempts to understand why the error occured.
Since we are talking about the log, is it possible (and/or included in future plans) to find a way to display the log using a skin? Could we have Rainmeter parse the log in "internal measures", and we would just display them as we like?
Inactive, due to life changes. Send me a PM for any question.
KreAch3R wrote:Since we are talking about the log, is it possible (and/or included in future plans) to find a way to display the log using a skin? Could we have Rainmeter parse the log in "internal measures", and we would just display them as we like?
Sounds interesting. Maybe a new measure type (Measure=Log).
jsmorley wrote:We were just talking about that, but feel that for debugging purposes, it is a better approach to have the "elapsed time" as it is, since that can support a level of detail down to the millisecond, which any variant of "clock time" won't.
We can get the "clock time" down to milliseconds as well. "Elapsed time" is useful in some cases for benchmarking things, but I agree with KreAch3R that "clock time" is more intuitive for others.
poiru wrote:
We can get the "clock time" down to milliseconds as well. "Elapsed time" is useful in some cases for benchmarking things, but I agree with KreAch3R that "clock time" is more intuitive for others.
I'm perfectly ok with it either way as long as we can get it as the level of milliseconds.
I would prefer a checkbox if possible: "Display Computer Time"
GitHub | DeviantArt | Tumblr
This is the song that never ends. It just goes on and on my friends. Some people started singing it not knowing what it was, and they'll continue singing it forever just because . . .
I'm glad that you liked the idea. Smurfier's suggestion is the least invasive for the end-user, so it's the safer option. I'm looking forward to the implementation, if the Rainmeter team decides so.
AlC wrote:
Sounds interesting. Maybe a new measure type (Measure=Log).
How about this? I agree with you, AlC, a new Measure is in the right direction. Thanks for suggesting Sepia, works like a charm! Other than that, the idea of the built-in feature is always appealing, so that we don't have to take the long route (creating a plain file and then parsing it).
Inactive, due to life changes. Send me a PM for any question.
