Fix/FSRS simulator fallback to memory_state_from_sm2 for after setting “Ignore cards reviewed before” #4187
Conversation
…g “Ignore cards reviewed before”
|
@user1823 I found that the change introduced in PR #3717 caused this problem. Due to Fine. I figure it out. If I revert the change on |
| let new_cards = | ||
| cards.iter().filter(|c| c.queue == CardQueue::New).count() + req.deck_size as usize; | ||
| let fsrs = FSRS::new(Some(&req.params))?; | ||
| let historical_retention = req.desired_retention; |
…ted logic - Added `historical_retention` field to `SimulateFsrsReviewRequest` in `scheduler.proto`. - Updated `simulator.rs` to use `req.historical_retention` instead of the removed `desired_retention`. - Modified `FsrsOptions.svelte` to include `historicalRetention` in the options passed to the component.
|
Could you rename the branch? GitHub is throwing up a warning. The head ref may contain hidden characters: "Fix/FSRS-simulator-fallback-to-memory_state_from_sm2-for-after-setting-\u201CIgnore-cards-reviewed-before\u201D" |
Yes. To prevent that issue, I made it so that the memory states of cards without any revlog are calculated only in the reviewer. |
I've tried to rename a branch assosiated with a pr before and it closed the PR, so we will need a second pr. Just a heads up. |
|
Thats ok with me. Moving forward, if you could keep the branch names not-too-long @L-M-Sherlock, that'd be appreciated :-) |
| .filter_map(|c| { | ||
| let memory_state = match c.memory_state { | ||
| Some(state) => state, | ||
| None => fsrs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't we exclude new cards here to improve performance and prevent introduction of new bugs?
Edit: filter(is_included_card) already excludes the new cards. I got confused by CardQueue::New => None, in the convert function. That's not actually needed, IMO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I got confused by
CardQueue::New => None,in theconvertfunction. That's not actually needed, IMO.
It's required by Rust's compiler.
Co-authored-by: user1823 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: user1823 <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: user1823 <[email protected]>
source: https://forums.ankiweb.net/t/strange-fsrs-simulator-result-after-setting-ignore-cards-reviewed-before/59876
It's a following patch for #3940