result-screens.md left this explicitly open: "the selection has not been shown".
It is shown now. Both screens that reference EX_ names carry the same
five-instruction idiom immediately before the choice - sub_822814D8 at 0x822815b4
and sub_8227A3A0 at 0x8227a408:
lwz r11, 4(rX) the owning object
lwz r11, 184(r11) a mode word at +184
addi r11, r11, -3
cntlzw r11, r11
rlwinm r11, r11, 27, 31, 31 r11 = 1 iff [+184] == 3
cmpli cr6, 0, r11, 0x0
bc 12, 4*cr6+eq, <plain> not 3 -> STAGE_RESULT / OVERVIEW
else -> EX_STAGE_RESULT / EX_OVERVIEW
cntlzw of zero is 32, and rotating left 27 lifts bit 5 into bit 31, so the
sequence is a branchless equals-3 test. The equal-to-zero branch takes the plain
name, so EX_ is chosen exactly when the word is 3.
A partition over the three key-list loaders the corpus already names:
loads +184 does not
references EX_ names 2 0
does not 0 1
sub_822814D8 and sub_8227A3A0 both load it; sub_82286BC8, which references no EX_
name, has no +184 access at all. Both off-diagonal cells are empty.
3 is the game's own EXTRA. challenge-mission-gate already established the
vocabulary for this constant at a three-way switch: == 3 is EXTRA, == 5 or 6 is
CHALLENGE, otherwise FILE. So the prefix reads literally - EX_ is the EXTRA
variant.
That REFINES the doc's tentative reading rather than confirming it. The section
proposed "EX_ = the challenge-mission debriefing" by analogy with _EXn on asset
names; the measured constant is EXTRA, which in the game's own three-way
vocabulary is a DIFFERENT kind from CHALLENGE (5/6).
Boundary of what was measured: the EXTRA = 3 constant is established at +144 of
the stage-loader class, while the word tested here is at +184 of [object + 4].
Same constant and the same EX/EXTRA naming, but two different offsets in what may
be two different objects - that the two fields are the same field is NOT shown,
only that both compare a mode word against 3.
All seventeen artefacts byte-identical.
d391130577