2bc20ec31d
sylpheed-port named a gap in their own rule: the fourth aside of mine to reach their authored data was a STRUCTURE, not a decoration, and 'the unchecked things carry no weight' did not cover it because a wrong field order looks like a fact. It carried no weight only by luck. The fix belongs at my end, so this is the control that should have existed when I published the layout. The obvious form fails, and its failure is the useful part: checking that all records are type-plausible passes on the SHIFTED alignments too, 69 of 70 in both directions. A homogeneous repeated table has the same field types in sequence, so any window starting on a field boundary type-checks and the interior carries no information about phase. Only the BOUNDARIES do. A shifted reading must consume a word from outside the table at one end, and that word does not obey the field's type -- which is exactly how the original error surfaced, record 0's handler reading as 0x10000000. Two-sided: the published alignment survives at both edges and both shifts fail. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
4.4 KiB
4.4 KiB