Partly closes ui-prm-primitives.md's standing blocker, "where an UNMEASURED
primitive paints". Raised by the port: build_12/build_15 composite to solid
black at every instant of their declared life, because pgloading_eff00.prm -- a
full-screen opaque quad -- sorts last.
The rule is a constraint read off the file, not a preference: an element that
covers the screen and is fully opaque at some instant cannot paint above
anything visible at that instant. Where the elements visible during its opaque
span are ALL of them, its position is forced to first.
pgloading_eff00.prm is opaque for 39 instants and all 9 other elements are
visible inside that span -> forced first, 4/4 instances.
Two controls, both measured orders from the running game, and the rule has to
survive both:
* palogo_eff0.prm is measured painting FIRST -- opaque 211 instants, forced
below 6 of 6. It is NAMED like an overlay, so a name-based rule sorts it
wrong against a measured order. Occlusion gets it right.
* pteff00.prm is measured painting LAST -- opaque for 2 instants at its
screen's entry and exit, forced below only 3 of 23, so the constraint
permits it on top where it belongs.
Disc-wide: 80 instances forced first, 50 constrained but not forced, 0
unconstrained. The split runs almost exactly along the names -- every *base* is
forced, every *eff00* is not -- with three families crossing it, which is
exactly why the name is not the rule.
It also explains 36 builds the corpus had recorded as "coming out one colour"
with no cause: pzeff00.prm is forced first in 32 of 32 instances, so they were
wiped by our own sort rather than by the game.
The rule's real limit was found by its own disc-wide test failing. Applied to
any element it claimed 22 .t32 SPRITES must sort first against their own layer
keys -- pneff01.t32 (key 0xd850, #8 of 13) and pbfriendly.t32 (0x9230, #17 of
49). A sprite's ELEMENT alpha says nothing about whether its TEXTURE covers the
screen, so forced_backdrop is now restricted to untextured primitives, which is
also the only case derived_paint_order consults it for.
Reach stated: assumes straight alpha-over (blend mode is still open, and an
additive quad at alpha 255 would not occlude); it is a lower bound, not an
ordering; and there is no new oracle measurement -- both controls are prior
ones, and a loading screen is not reachable from the title path.
3 new disc tests; the 13 paint-order tests are green, including
the_derived_order_matches_the_measured_ones_up_to_ties.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01QsEPXWVaEpyfudtR6re1Pd
Last iteration I claimed the splash's measured_paint_order [0,2,4,6,1,3,5]
records, between its glow and logo halves, the temporal order they were
seen in rather than depth -- because the halves never share a frame.
The no-overlap measurement is right (glows f94-115, logos f116-211). The
inference is wrong, on two independent grounds:
* Wrong source. That vector is not a read of the draw capture. It is a
read of the live screen object's CHILD ARRAY -- ui-screen-runtime.md
records it literally as "paint order (child slots)". A child list has
a definite order whether or not its children are ever drawn together,
so co-occurrence does not bear on it. The capture was the CHECK.
* The order is in the file anyway. paint_order_audit on GP_TITLE entry
11: derived == measured, 0 inverted pairs, 0 same-layer-key ties. The
glows and logos carry distinct T8aD keys (0xa100 < 0xa110), so the
file orders the halves statically, no capture involved.
I asked the question that started this iteration -- do the title and menu
orders have the same problem -- and the answer is that none of the three
does, for the same reason.
What survives is narrower and now recorded with numbers: how much of each
order its capture actually cross-checks. The title capture is stable (8
draws / 12 quads / 5 textures, identical in all five captured frames
across two logs) and confirms 7 of 24 positions; the menu capture is not
(texture 0x11C30000 present in frame 0, gone by frame 3); the splash
capture cannot cross-check its middle at all.
A counting trap worth the tool: count QUADS, not draws. The menu's draw 9
is indices=24 -- six quads batched from one texture. Counting draws reads
9 where 16 are on screen, and an earlier pass of this analysis briefly
"found" three quads for six declarations that way and concluded elements
were missing. They were batched.
METHOD: check what a "measured" value was measured FROM before reasoning
about its limits. The co-occurrence rule is real, and it is specific to
orders read from draw captures.
ui-prm-primitives recorded that where a .prm paints on a screen without a
measured order is unsolved. For the developer splash it is now measured.
Every frame opens with two full-screen draws before any sprite. The
second is untextured in all 212 frames with a constant vertex colour of
FF000000 -- opaque black -- matching palogo_eff0.prm's declaration
exactly: kind 0x10, pivot (640,360) -> 1280x720, one keyframe, a = 255.
So the splash backdrop is an opaque black full-screen quad from the
bundle itself, painted behind every sprite, which is why a splash render
needs --black rather than the default backdrop.
Not a general rule, and said so: the measured main-menu order puts
pteff02.prm at position 4 and pteff00.prm LAST, the latter being the
screen-transition fade.
And a correction to an existing row. measured_paint_order returns
[0, 2, 4, 6, 1, 3, 5] for the splash, described as "the .prm, then all
three glows, then the three logos". But the glows and the logos never
appear in the same frame -- 0 overlapping frames in 235 -- and two
elements that never co-occur have no observable relative depth. Between
those halves the vector records the order they were SEEN IN, not a
front-to-back relationship.
That does not make the render wrong, and element 0 is a real depth
observation since the .prm co-occurs with everything. But the type of the
claim matters: reading the vector as depth invites compositing all seven
elements at once, which is exactly what does not reproduce the screen.
METHOD: two things that never co-occur have no observable relative order;
when recording an order, note which pairs actually appeared together.
Two places checked for the key a .prm element sorts by, both empty:
* the declaration entry's four unread words are constant across every element
of all three measured screens (+28=0, +36=0xffffffff, +56=0, and +44 is a
button ordinal 1-5, 0xffffffff elsewhere);
* the bundle carries NO data for a primitive at all - the menu build declares
pteff00.prm, pteff02.prm and pteff05.t32 and has zero RATC children for any
of them, its 34 children being 21 T8aD sprites and 13 .rat records.
So the layer comes from the game code. But it is consistent, which is what makes
a per-name table a measurement rather than a fudge. Bracketing each unkeyed
element between the keys of its measured neighbours: pteff02.prm falls in
(0x8010, 0x8040) on BOTH screens it appears on, pteff00.prm is past the maximum
on both, and palogo_eff0.prm is below the minimum on the splash.
implied_layer_key records exactly those and nothing else; an unlisted primitive
keeps u32::MAX and still sorts last. With it, derived_paint_order produces the
same layer-key sequence as the order read off the running game on all three
measured screens - primitives included - and matches element-for-element on four
of the five bundle instances. The fifth is the title, differing only inside its
tied groups, which is a separate open question.
This does not make include_primitives safe by default: the 36 builds that come
out one colour are wiped by pzeff00.prm and pceff00.prm, never measured, hence
not in the table.
14 disc tests green.
fill_quad composites an untextured primitive as a solid rectangle of the
keyframes fade colour, pivot x 2 in size, placed and scaled exactly as a sprite
is. Behind ComposeOptions::include_primitives and screen render --primitives.
On the title screen, whose paint order is ground truth, it is measurably right:
mean luminance 76.30 -> 63.72 against the captures 64.58, i.e. from +18% to
-1.3%, and mean absolute difference 16.07 -> 13.08. The background was ~40% too
bright; pteff02.prm, a 25% black dim, was what was missing. The wordmark is not
dimmed by it because the measured order paints that quad at slot 4, beneath the
logo. Edge correlation moves 0.9538 -> 0.9480, which is not informative here: a
uniform dim scales gradients uniformly so a normalised edge score barely sees it.
OFF BY DEFAULT, and that is the finding. A primitive has no T8aD header, so no
layer key, and derived_paint_order sorts the keyless to the end. GP_DIALOGs
pzeff00.prm is a single keyframe of opaque black at full screen; painted last it
wipes the build. Of the 125 builds that draw a visible primitive, 36 come out
>99% one colour with the derived order.
No constant default works, because the two screens read off the running game
disagree: the splash paints its primitive FIRST (the black backdrop) while the
title paints one at slot 4 and another LAST (the fade-out). Declaration order
fails the title too. A disc test measures the damage rather than asserting the
feature works, so the number moves when the ordering is solved.
Also records a false alarm worth keeping: a first pass reported 36 GP_DIALOG
builds at "100% black", which was a crude near-black pixel threshold and not a
black screen - those dialogs are dimmed 50% and perfectly legible. The genuinely
wiped builds are a different set.
369 .prm elements exist in the disc's screen builds and every composite is
missing them. Swept statically:
* none of the 369 has a RATC child of its own name — no payload, nothing to
draw, so .prm is a primitive and not a sprite;
* kind & 0x10 and a .prm name agree with ZERO exceptions in either direction
over all 965 builds, so the format marks primitives as a decoded field and a
port need not parse filenames;
* 361 of 369 are exactly 1280x720 at scale 100% in the corner, and their
keyframe 'fade' ARGB is overwhelmingly black at some alpha — these are the
fade-to-black, dim-behind-menu and flash layers, i.e. the PRMD dim-quad the
compositor's backdrop has been standing in for.
Refuted before believing: drawing them at Element::rest() is wrong. The title's
pteff00.prm is opaque -> transparent -> transparent -> opaque, a transition whose
resting pose is the transparent plateau; rest() picks by longest dwell and lands
on the opaque endpoint, which is painted LAST on that screen and would black out
the title. A test asserts that wrong answer deliberately so that fixing the
resting rule fails it and leads to the note.
No compositing change: the resting rule is not .prm-specific and has to be A/B'd
against the title framebuffer capture first.
