[BTC-TC] Virtual Community Exchange [CLOSED] - page 60.

Lohoris

hero member

Activity: 630

Merit: 500

Bitgoblin

Quote from: burnside on August 06, 2013, 12:04:07 AM

I'm not sure how exactly to filter that... in the db interface it looks like this:

We�have�received�our�sample-PCB�and�it�is�being�tested�in�every�aspect.�

Really strange.

Keep the database in unicode, and use CSS property `overflow-x:hidden;`

matt4054

legendary

Activity: 1946

Merit: 1035

Quote from: burnside on August 06, 2013, 12:04:07 AM

Quote from: AngelSky on August 04, 2013, 07:16:14 PM

@burnside: why not str_replace(" ", " ", $news_text); ?

because...:

I'm not sure how exactly to filter that... in the db interface it looks like this:

We�have�received�our�sample-PCB�and�it�is�being�tested�in�every�aspect.�

Really strange.

I think the real technical issue behind this is could be a headache to back trace.

As far as I have experienced, � appears as a sign of a stream decoding error while parsing (supposedly broken or corrupted) Unicode, especially through a database with certain settings. I believe it may be related to a special CJK whitespace character that is rendered as a non-breaking space, but it is not the HTML entity. And it probably appears as � in your DB backend.

Best real world solution IMO: copy and paste in a Unicode supporting text editor, and search & replace the offending whitespace with the standard U+0020

Cheers

EDIT: In TextWrangler, there is this wonderful command called "Zap Gremlins", which does exactly what we want here, i.e. convert every strange thing into plain old regular straight ASCII Grin

You may want to used the sanitized quote:

Quote

We have received our sample-PCB and it is being tested in every aspect. Everything s running well so far. ( Mass production of PCBs will start later and can be finished within one week in Shenzhen)

We also dealed with an acquaintances packaging factory to shorten the Package period from 10days to 3days. I.E. we will get our chips in hand only 3-4 days later after out of Fab.

We will hold a meeting next weekend in Beijing to discuz our future plans incl.: 2nd gen chips, deployment plans for 1st gen chips, application of analog circuit in our project , a lot of experts both on R and D have been invited.

burnside

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1006

Lead Blockchain Developer

Quote from: AngelSky on August 04, 2013, 07:16:14 PM

@burnside: why not str_replace(" ", " ", $news_text); ?

because...:

I'm not sure how exactly to filter that... in the db interface it looks like this:

We�have�received�our�sample-PCB�and�it�is�being�tested�in�every�aspect.�

Really strange.

burnside

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1006

Lead Blockchain Developer

Quote from: dexX7 on August 05, 2013, 08:12:15 PM

Bingo!

Quote

[02:11:28] 1 ASK ACTIVEMINING @ 0,1
{"status":"success","response":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.1 BTC: Placed Sale Order #959414: 1 @ 0.1 BTC.

"}

[02:11:16] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,0001
{"status":"success","response":"Received Bid Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.0001 BTC: Placed Purchase Order #959404: 1 @ 0.0001 BTC.

"}

Sweet. Moved it from oauth/trade_new to oauth/trade. Thanks again!

dexX7

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1026

Bingo!

Quote

[02:11:28] 1 ASK ACTIVEMINING @ 0,1
{"status":"success","response":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.1 BTC: Placed Sale Order #959414: 1 @ 0.1 BTC.

"}

[02:11:16] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,0001
{"status":"success","response":"Received Bid Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.0001 BTC: Placed Purchase Order #959404: 1 @ 0.0001 BTC.

"}

burnside

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1006

Lead Blockchain Developer

Quote from: dexX7 on August 05, 2013, 07:32:37 PM

Well, I would.. I think it's essential to get the lock error resolved.

Quote

[01:31:02] 1 ASK ACTIVEMINING @ 0,01
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.01. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 0.01 BTC
\nExcessive wait trying to get lock on ACTIVEMINING."}

[01:30:10] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,1

[01:30:02] 1 ASK ACTIVEMINING @ 0,1
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.1. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 0.1 BTC
\nPlaced Sale Order #957742: 1 @ 0.1 BTC.\n"}

[01:29:50] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,0001
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.0001. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 0.0001 BTC
\nPlaced Purchase Order #957724: 1 @ 0.0001 BTC.\n"}

But order ids show up. That's really a good thing. Wink

Ok, I think I figured it out. Round #3?

BTW. Thanks a bunch for helping like this. Wink

pascal257

sr. member

Activity: 493

Merit: 262

Quote from: burnside on August 05, 2013, 06:10:35 PM

The order # is in the response string.

Thanks, haven't noticed that. Should be fine for now.

dexX7

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1026

Well, I would.. I think it's essential to get the lock error resolved.

Quote

[01:31:02] 1 ASK ACTIVEMINING @ 0,01
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.01. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 0.01 BTC
\nExcessive wait trying to get lock on ACTIVEMINING."}

[01:30:10] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,1

[01:30:02] 1 ASK ACTIVEMINING @ 0,1
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.1. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 0.1 BTC
\nPlaced Sale Order #957742: 1 @ 0.1 BTC.\n"}

[01:29:50] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,0001
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.0001. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 0.0001 BTC
\nPlaced Purchase Order #957724: 1 @ 0.0001 BTC.\n"}

But order ids show up. That's really a good thing. Wink

burnside

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1006

Lead Blockchain Developer

Quote from: dexX7 on August 05, 2013, 07:00:45 PM

Quote from: burnside on August 05, 2013, 06:10:35 PM

Can someone please test it at https://btct.co/oauth/trade_new ? If it passes a few test runs, I'll move it into place.

Code:

[00:47:39] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0.00012:
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.00012. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 0.00012 BTC
\nPlaced Purchase Order 1 @ 0.00012 BTC.\n"} << Bid placed though.

[00:48:47] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0.12:
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.12. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 0.12 BTC
\nPlaced Sale Order 1 @ 0.12 BTC.\n"} << Ask placed though.

[00:49:12] 1 BID NOTAVAILABLE @ 0.15:
Error:

Invalid Ticker.

[00:50:27] 1 BID LABCOIN @ 1200,000000
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of LABCOIN @ 1200. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 1200 BTC
\nOrder failed. This order would cost 1202.40000000. Your balance is X.\n"}

[00:53:27] 1 BID LABCOIN @ 0,001600
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of LABCOIN @ 0.0016. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 0.0016 BTC
\nExcessive wait trying to get lock on LABCOIN."}

[00:54:18] 1 ASK DMS.SELLING @ 16,000000
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of DMS.SELLING @ 16. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 16 BTC
\nYou do not own any DMS.SELLING.\n"}

Edit:

Can't buy or sell right now. Either gets extensive lock or an empty result.

Thank you. I adjusted the regex on the "Placed" orders. Round #2?

The excessive waits I'm still working on... I know they suck. Sad

dexX7

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1026

Quote from: burnside on August 05, 2013, 06:10:35 PM

Can someone please test it at https://btct.co/oauth/trade_new ? If it passes a few test runs, I'll move it into place.

Quote

[00:47:39] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,000120:
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.00012. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 0.00012 BTC
\nPlaced Purchase Order 1 @ 0.00012 BTC.\n"} << Bid placed though.

[00:48:47] 1 BID ACTIVEMINING @ 0,120000:
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of ACTIVEMINING @ 0.12. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 0.12 BTC
\nPlaced Sale Order 1 @ 0.12 BTC.\n"} << Ask placed though.

[00:49:12] 1 BID NOTAVAILABLE @ 0,150000:
Error:

Invalid Ticker.

[00:50:27] 1 BID LABCOIN @ 1200,000000
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of LABCOIN @ 1200. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 1200 BTC
\nOrder failed. This order would cost 1202.40000000. Your balance is X.\n"}

[00:53:27] 1 BID LABCOIN @ 0,001600
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Bid Order: 1 of LABCOIN @ 0.0016. Received Bid Order Request: 1 @ 0.0016 BTC
\nExcessive wait trying to get lock on LABCOIN."}

[00:54:18] 1 ASK DMS.SELLING @ 16,000000
{"status":"error","error_message":"Received Ask Order: 1 of DMS.SELLING @ 16. Received Ask Order Request: 1 @ 16 BTC
\nYou do not own any DMS.SELLING.\n"}

Edit:

Can't buy or sell right now. Either gets excessiv lock or an empty result.

burnside

legendary

Activity: 1106

Merit: 1006

Lead Blockchain Developer

Quote from: Rannasha on August 05, 2013, 09:10:25 AM

Quote from: pascal257 on August 05, 2013, 09:06:40 AM

I have 2 feature requests for the API:

1. Return Order ID in the response of submitting bid/ask
2. When excessive wait occurs, set status to fail and not success

To add to point 2, I believe an order placed while there is insufficient funds also returns a success, but with a response-message that contains the error.

Basically, as long as your request is well-formed and the security exists, a submit request will return a success, even though the order may not have been placed.

I've fixed both of these in the API response as best I could in a quick manner. The order # is in the response string. (sorry, the method that processes the requests only currently returns a string, so it's the only way I could get it in.) The fail/success I have plugged in a regexp to detect one way or the other. This is as good as it gets until I can reformat the underlying method call to return an array rather than just the single string.

Can someone please test it at https://btct.co/oauth/trade_new ? If it passes a few test runs, I'll move it into place.

Cheers.

Quote from: VolanicEruptor on August 05, 2013, 05:50:48 PM

"Access temporarily denied" Huh

5-10 minute block for too many accesses too fast. We're very aggressive with our DDoS protections. We're more lenient if you are logged in.

Cheers.

VolanicEruptor

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

"Access temporarily denied" Huh

Rannasha

hero member

Activity: 728

Merit: 500

Quote from: pascal257 on August 05, 2013, 09:06:40 AM

I have 2 feature requests for the API:

1. Return Order ID in the response of submitting bid/ask
2. When excessive wait occurs, set status to fail and not success

To add to point 2, I believe an order placed while there is insufficient funds also returns a success, but with a response-message that contains the error.

Basically, as long as your request is well-formed and the security exists, a submit request will return a success, even though the order may not have been placed.

pascal257

sr. member

Activity: 493

Merit: 262

I have 2 feature requests for the API:

1. Return Order ID in the response of submitting bid/ask
2. When excessive wait occurs, set status to fail and not success

VolanicEruptor

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250