1adb4e2ee7
sylpheed-port aimed my own boundary finding at my loop-length control. Reproduced from my reader over every pak: +0x04 has 0 violations too, so the falsifier rejects +0x0c and accepts +0x04 and never discriminated. What identifies +0x08 is the exactness statistic the page presents as secondary -- exact match in half the records against 0 % for +0x04. Population differs from theirs, 3311 records against 1781, because this scan takes every pak and requires a timed keyframe, so the percentage moves but the discrimination does not. Second time this week with the weight on the wrong leg: a count taking credit for an exclusion argument, now a falsifier taking credit for an exactness statistic, and both times the real discriminator sat beside it described as a formality. Their general form is sharper than my boundary rule: an interior consistency check is satisfied by any internally consistent reading, and that is what a wrong offset into a regular structure usually is. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
65 lines
2.8 KiB
Rust
65 lines
2.8 KiB
Rust
//! Does the `+0x08` falsifier actually identify `+0x08`?
|
|
//!
|
|
//! `ui-record-loop-length.md` (mine) rests on: an animation cannot restart before
|
|
//! its own last pose, so a wrong reading should produce violations, and none exist
|
|
//! in 1 781 records. `sylpheed-port` re-ran it at the neighbouring offsets and
|
|
//! reports the falsifier ACCEPTS `+0x04` too — meaning it does not discriminate,
|
|
//! and the real evidence is the exactness statistic I called a formality.
|
|
//!
|
|
//! This checks that from my own reader before I correct the page.
|
|
//!
|
|
//! cargo run -p sylpheed-formats --example loop_length_offset_discriminates
|
|
use sylpheed_formats::{pak::PakArchive, ui_layout};
|
|
use std::path::PathBuf;
|
|
|
|
fn be32(b: &[u8], o: usize) -> Option<u32> {
|
|
(b.len() >= o + 4).then(|| u32::from_be_bytes([b[o], b[o + 1], b[o + 2], b[o + 3]]))
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
fn main() {
|
|
let root = PathBuf::from(std::env::var("SYLPHEED_DISC").expect("SYLPHEED_DISC"));
|
|
let dat = root.join("dat");
|
|
let mut paks: Vec<_> = std::fs::read_dir(&dat)
|
|
.expect("dat")
|
|
.filter_map(|e| e.ok().map(|e| e.path()))
|
|
.filter(|p| p.extension().map(|x| x == "pak").unwrap_or(false))
|
|
.collect();
|
|
paks.sort();
|
|
// offset -> (records, violations where word < max_t, exact matches)
|
|
let mut stat = [(0usize, 0usize, 0usize); 3];
|
|
let offsets = [0x04usize, 0x08, 0x0c];
|
|
for p in &paks {
|
|
let Ok(ar) = PakArchive::open(p) else { continue };
|
|
for e in ar.entries() {
|
|
let Ok(by) = ar.read(e) else { continue };
|
|
let Some(b) = ui_layout::parse_build(&by) else { continue };
|
|
for (_, (off, size)) in &b.records {
|
|
let rec = &by[*off..(*off + *size).min(by.len())];
|
|
if rec.len() < 0x10 || &rec[0..4] != b"RATC" {
|
|
continue;
|
|
}
|
|
let Some(leaf) = ui_layout::parse_build(rec) else { continue };
|
|
let max_t = leaf
|
|
.elements
|
|
.iter()
|
|
.flat_map(|el| el.keyframes.iter().filter_map(|k| k.time))
|
|
.max();
|
|
let Some(max_t) = max_t else { continue };
|
|
for (i, o) in offsets.iter().enumerate() {
|
|
if let Some(w) = be32(rec, *o) {
|
|
stat[i].0 += 1;
|
|
if w < max_t { stat[i].1 += 1 }
|
|
if w == max_t { stat[i].2 += 1 }
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
println!("{:>8} {:>9} {:>12} {:>14}", "offset", "records", "violations", "exact == max_t");
|
|
for (i, o) in offsets.iter().enumerate() {
|
|
let (n, v, x) = stat[i];
|
|
println!(" +0x{o:02X} {n:>9} {v:>12} ({:>5.1}%) {x:>8} ({:>5.1}%)",
|
|
100.0 * v as f64 / n.max(1) as f64, 100.0 * x as f64 / n.max(1) as f64);
|
|
}
|
|
}
|