It also turns out that every sample machine that claims to be F0V3 in its
property file contains only F0V2 data, so there appears to be nothing
additional to test, but now there are more warnings in case we ever do
actually encounter F0V3 data.
Also warn if we ever encounter oximetry.
Still trying to figure out timestamp event.
Other summary parsers will need review, since there was an initial
filter that was dropping sessions that began with event 5 or 6,
now commented out.
The new slice type appears when humidifier settings have changed during
the session, and includes a timestamp. The session time now matches
reports.
Otherwise just comments to indicate other values seen in the sample data,
including a lead on humidifier encoding.
Also add some debug messages to FV3 parsing. It's clear the current
approach is wrong. This looks a lot like the slices seen earlier,
since hbdata values appear more than once in a given file.
Also turn off summary YAML since the next bit of work will focus on
parsing.
It turns out the session end time was intentionally not being set in ParseSummary,
probably due to its unreliability. This may be revisited once things are more
stable, but for now the old behavior is retained.
Remarkably, this resulted in nearly no changes to the test output.
Only one session with 0 duration had its start/end times reset to 0,
since it will no longer get imported.
Also move an extra unsupported check out of PRSImport::ImportSummary
into CreateMachineFromProperties, where it should intervene before
reaching PRS1Import. Leave a warning debug message in its place.
Each input file's chunks get emitted into a single output YAML file. As parsing
gets separated from conversion/import, this will allow for testing and
examination of the parsed input files before they are transformed into
sessions.
This fix also seems like it cleans up some of the weird session IDs. It appears
that session IDs were sticking around after each machine, adding those
IDs or sessions to subsequent machines in that run of the test. Since the
test was being run piecemeal while under development, this produced
different behavior when being run with different segments of the data.
This has already exposed many limitations, and possibly some memory trampling. Before this will work as
a true regression test, we'll need to address both of those, so that this produces reliable, reproducible
output.
