Fix NaNs if solar is 0

[mattjgalloway]

Fixes #14.

/cc @Paul-Reed

[Paul-Reed]

@mattjgalloway just applied your diff and I'm seeing --% shouldn't it be 0%

[mattjgalloway]

I decided on -- %, because it sort of doesn't make sense to be 0% (which is why it's coming out as NaN) as it's 0/0. Is that 0? Is it infinity? I liked the "-- %" because I trained myself to look at those numbers and see 0% export as "awesome!" and 0% direct as "oh that's terrible". So the "-- %" made me realise that I should ignore these numbers as there's no generation.

[Paul-Reed]

Technically, yes you are correct, but I wonder if the end user would expect to see 0% ?
I'll stick a post in the forum and try to get a consensus opinion.

[mattjgalloway]

Sure - yeh let's see what others think. I think it's definitely worth distinguishing it from actually 0% somehow. It could be we dim it out for example?

[Paul-Reed]

Thanks Matt, added as --%

[glynhudson]

Great, sounds good to me. Thanks!

• sent from my mobile device

On 10 Sep 2016 15:53, "Paul Reed" notifications@github.com wrote:

Merged #19 #19.

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#19 (comment), or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAuUPAw8bthpxKkF_BG97sYYtnEBDvwbks5qorY8gaJpZM4J42lT
.