Files
Syplheed-Reborn/docs/re/BACKLOG.md
claude-re 93d6534efe docs/re: open a backlog, first item = capital ships assemble wrong in the viewer
The runtime-capture write-up declares static ship assembly exact, but its test
covers exactly one ship (e106). Records what is suspect (engine-cluster rig,
the X-reflect twin heuristic, cross-id turrets), and that the F10 capture is
already the oracle to settle it on a second class.
2026-07-30 17:01:32 +00:00

2.4 KiB
Raw Blame History

RE backlog

Open items that are not being worked right now. Each entry says what is wrong or unknown, what evidence exists, and what the first step would be. Move an item into INDEX.md (with a structures/…md or a parser + test) once it is actually settled.


Capital ships assemble wrong in the viewer

Reported: 2026-07-30, by the user. Status: open, not investigated.

The reborn viewer builds capital ships from the split XBG7 parts via sylpheed-formats::ship::assemble_ship, and they come out wrong — parts in the wrong place / wrong orientation.

Why this is a real finding and not a known limitation: the RE write-up ship-placement-runtime-capture.md declares static assembly exact as of 2026-07-26 — 9-channel joint tables [TX TY TZ RY RX RZ SX SY SZ], Euler Ry·Rx·Rz, with ship::tests::static_assembly_matches_runtime_capture asserting static == runtime capture (T < 1.0, R < 0.02). So either the viewer is not using that path, or the claim generalises worse than the test suggests.

The likely gap: that test is one ship — the e106 destroyer, 8 parts plus two nacelles, two turrets and the hull mirror. Nothing pins the other classes. Rules that were derived from e106 and could easily be e106-specific:

  • the engine cluster rig mounted at GN_Engine_01 (two mirrored nacelles + centre);
  • "X-reflect the shared-geometry twin whose lateral offset opposes the geometry's dominant side" — a heuristic, not a decoded flag;
  • cross-id turret instancing (×2).

First step (the oracle already exists): re-run the runtime capture on a different capital ship and diff static vs captured, exactly as e106 was done — F10 in the capture-ship-placement build of xenia-canary-native dumps the ship shader's c0..c2 WorldViewProjection rows per part; WV_ref⁻¹ · WV_p is the ship-space rigid transform, which is ground truth. Pick a class whose rig differs from e106 (different engine count, a ship with no sld, a carrier). Then extend static_assembly_matches_runtime_capture into a per-ship table so a regression in one class cannot hide behind e106 passing.

Also worth ruling out first, cheaply: that the viewer's own transform stack (scale, handedness, node-instance recursion) is not re-breaking a correct assembly — compare the viewer's placement against assemble_ship's output directly before blaming the format layer.