Add PM10, PM2, PM1 sensors to AC-device #613
Conversation
|
|
|
Given this state below, I wonder what I should implement to get "airState.quality.airMon = 1" (as being: measurements always on) working.
|
|
@ollo69 where can I find the integration diagnostic? |
|
Here:
|
|
I think what would be nice is if #614 is added, to make the sensor availability dependent on ('airMon' or not 'poweroff'), so there wouldn't be a false sense of security based on the minimum value. |
It is better to proceed by step. When this PR is completed and merged you can rebase #614 to provide additional features. |
| support_key = self._get_state_key(SUPPORT_AIR_POLUTION) | ||
| if self._device.model_info.enum_value(support_key, "@PM1_0_SUPPORT") is None: | ||
| return None |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggest here to create a new function at device level, eg. is_pm_supported (similar, for example to is_mode_airclean_supported), to avoid to scan model_info every status refresh.
You could start creating a new constant:
SUPPORT_PM = [SUPPORT_AIR_POLUTION, ["@PM1_0_SUPPORT", "@PM10_SUPPORT", "@PM2_5_SUPPORT"]]
In the new function you should loop the second array and createa new boolean array (and store this in a new device attribute) that represent supported PM type.
Then here you can just call the device method that will scan model_info only on the first call.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As commited in 7cb81de.
Do you have any suggestion how to debug this component outside homeassistant?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- Install Docker Desktop and Visual studio code
- Open the project with Visual studio code
- When the project is open, select the option
clone in a new volume - A new environment will be created, and you can run a copy of HA with integration for test (command palette -> run task -> run home assistant core).
Do you want that I wait for your test result before merging?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, I test this code now by every time copying it to my 'live' HA. But there was an issue yesterday where I made a mistake and only saw in the evening what the issue actually was. I wondered if there was an option just to run this part of the code, for example in pycharm, so that debugging options are available.
| @property | ||
| def is_pm10_supported(self): | ||
| """Return if PM sensors are supported.""" | ||
| if self._is_pm_supported is None: | ||
| self._is_pm_supported = self._is_mode_supported(SUPPORT_PM) | ||
| return self._is_pm_supported[0] | ||
|
|
||
| @property | ||
| def is_pm25_supported(self): | ||
| """Return if PM sensors are supported.""" | ||
| if self._is_pm_supported is None: | ||
| self._is_pm_supported = self._is_mode_supported(SUPPORT_PM) | ||
| return self._is_pm_supported[2] | ||
|
|
||
| @property | ||
| def is_pm1_supported(self): | ||
| """Return if PM sensors are supported.""" | ||
| if self._is_pm_supported is None: | ||
| self._is_pm_supported = self._is_mode_supported(SUPPORT_PM) | ||
| return self._is_pm_supported[1] | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure that I like to have 3 different properties, because I'm planning to replace cache attributes with cached_property and I couldn't use in this case.
Apart this I like this approach, I'll think about this later.
Maybe should be better to order the array in different way (PM1, PM25 and PM10)? Or you use this order for a specific reason (I'm not a PM expert)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because from a human readability standpoint I liked:
1 = PM1
2 = PM2
0 = PM10 ;-)
I initially modelled this as a dictionary, with a key lookup, but for some reason, I could not get def is_pm_supported(self, key): working.
|
Please fix linting. If you use dev environment as explained above, black formatting is applied by Visual Studio on save. |
For this project I am using vim. Any thing I can run from the commandline? |
Vim, the programming environment for people who don't have to ask 😉. |
Oh you actually now ran the tests. To be honest I have never heard about "black" before. Isn't |
|
@ollo69 model_info.py is changed by black too. |
|
Probably because you are not using right parameters for formatting |
|
I ran |
|
Probably you are using wrong black version. Check |
Indeed. 20 vs 23. |
This is my first copy-paste code for this project. I have not ran the code, as I first have to figure out how to do so in the HACS situation.
Fix #606