This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Seren
1
« on: December 17, 2009, 08:07:24 pm »
On the back of the calculator is the serial number.
For example,
2635016775 P-0509H
The only calculators that pass have a "P" where the P is in this example serial, and also, there CANNOT be an "H" where the H is in the example.
2
« on: December 15, 2009, 06:05:03 pm »
Yeah, but it was just that I was under the impression that MirageOS or Doors only modified the bytes that were changed because of SMC in the archive to prevent Garbage Collections. But of course, I know now this is not the case.
4
« on: December 14, 2009, 04:24:31 pm »
On a side note, how do you unlock Flash? I remember reading something about manipulating the stack and jumping to a place in the boot code or something, but I really don't know how. Also, is there a delay when writing to Flash? (Anything else I should know?)
5
« on: December 10, 2009, 04:17:07 pm »
No, I read directly from Flash memory for the sound, and I read from the RAM for the information about button placement (I probably should keep it in the Flash memory, to avoid losing it in case of a crash, but I've been too lazy to figure out how to unlock the flash, and how to write to it (to change the highscores))
6
« on: December 10, 2009, 04:00:42 pm »
Well, I've kinda become rather busy (hence the fact that I've disappeared for a bit) I'm actually about to convert all the Guitar Hero I/II/III & Encore Rocks the 80s into Guitar Calculator files, but it's hard for me to find time to work on it. I wouldn't mind porting this to the 83, but I'm probably going to rewrite the code to remove sound functionality from the Ti-83+ (since it's pretty bad and cannot support the higher quality I put for 15mHz calculators). It would probably be at that point that I would make it for the 83, but, because of my time constraints, I don't know when this will happen. On the other hand, I would have to know the differences between the Ti-83 and Ti-83+. ~ The three main things I need to know to make a version for the Ti-83, if I get to it, is: I don't believe the 83 has application variables? ( http://tibasicdev.wikidot.com/file-extensions) In that case I would probably have to store my application variables as programs or something? How is the memory on the 83 organised? Does it have any ROM? Does it use paging? How so? How do bcalls work?
7
« on: September 04, 2009, 04:38:54 pm »
Well, I've never gotten WabbitEmu to work. All I get is what's seen in the picture I attached. Any idea why that happens?
Well, tell me if you get the acute static-like buzz for Sweet Child o' Mine on cheaper earpieces. I hear static but no acute buzz (the static is light enough that if you focus on the song itself you can ignore the static)
8
« on: September 04, 2009, 03:26:57 pm »
First of all, the buzz sounds less if you use cheap earpieces (and not computer speakers from a computer emulator). Next, if you mean the previous version as in the 6mHz one on unitedti (confirm what you mean please), then yes, it was not as loud for I Love Rock N' Roll. On the other hand, for most songs, they sounded a lot better (see if Sweet Child o' Mine sounds like that, it doesn't for me). Rock n' Roll was actually rather poorly "enhanced". In the new version you can hear the words, but there's more static. On the other hand, the old version (1-bit) has no buzz like that, but the quality is too low to hear the words (giving a generally impression of the tune of the song).
It's possible that I have a slight glitch in my decompression routine (resulting in garbage), or that my data gets partially corrupted sometime inbetween decompression and outi-ing it to the port (which is a possibility).
So check for Sweet Child o' Mine, and tell me what you get.
9
« on: September 03, 2009, 05:25:56 pm »
Yeah sure -never optimized it for memory either. I only knew that it worked on my computer. The wav format is really simple. The first four characters of the file are "RIFF.". The next 4 bytes are the length of the rest of the file. After that comes "WAVE" (at 08). This identifies the file as a wav file. Following that are two groups of information. The first group, right after "WAVE", is called "fmt " (with a space after the t). The four bytes after give the length of the "fmt " section. This section basically gives information on the wave file: Does it use compression, how many kHz, 8-bit, 16, 24-bit? How many channels, etc. After "fmt " comes "data". (Again, the four next bytes specify the length). After data is all the information about the song. If the wave file is 8-bit & mono, each byte represents 1 tick of sound in the wave file (determined by the frequency - which is 8.000 kHz for GuitCalc). So I basically read 1 byte at a time here in the data section. Here's detailed information that I just found off the net if you're interested: http://web.archive.org/web/20071203105906/http://www.sonicspot.com/guide/wavefiles.html
10
« on: September 02, 2009, 10:45:19 pm »
I made the effort of going through my code and commenting everything to allow for a basic understanding. This is in VB2008, and not VB6, btw.
Enjoy.
Edit: Oops, I forgot to make a small change when I commented things. When you open the project, you'll notice "Form1.vb" is invalid. You'll need to go into Project>Add Existing Item, and choose "Form2.vb" (which was the new commented form I had made).
11
« on: September 02, 2009, 09:21:25 pm »
Visual Basic - very inefficiently and badly formatted, etc, but it gets the job done.
12
« on: September 02, 2009, 08:28:15 pm »
Looking at your longer object-drawing method, and addressing the issue of interacting objects...
save screen
clear screen
draw object
mask object with above 3 land masks
save pic
clear screen
draw object mask
mask mask with above 3 land masks
save pic
recall landscape
AND mask pic
OR object pic
I'm wondering if you could do all the objects simultaneously - Draw all the objects, and put the "above" land masks of all the objects in the form of a list, and go through them one by one.
The only problem that would occur would be when an object is in front of a tile in front of another object. Then the top of the lower object would be cut off by the "overlapping" tile. The solution I see to that is to split tiles into two parts: the "normal square" of the tile, and the "overlapping" section. I don't know how this will affect your drawing engine, or if you simply add the "overlapping section" as a completely new parameter of your tile (and not modifying the current tile-drawing engine), I don't know how much extra space it would take. However, this eliminates the problem I just mentioned (this idea working with the "height" idea mentioned earlier - except I now see it more as a simple flag (either 0 or 1) which indicates whether the current object has the "overlapping" section or not).
Now, the problem remains when an object is in front of another object. A way to do it would be to draw all the objects from furthest away to closest, but you'd have to use their masks to erase objects behind the closer ones (and as a random optimization, the first object you draw won't need to use its mask - maybe you could also detect objects in proximity? (don't know if it would be faster to check if there are nearby objects or to simply apply the mask for all the objects)). However, once you have done that step, you can treat the whole collection of objects on your screen as one single giant object (I think) and apply the land masks as one on all your objects.
How does that sound? Will it work?
13
« on: September 02, 2009, 07:48:37 pm »
I apologize if I sounded insulting; it was never my intention.
What I suggest in order to increase the speed of your object method is to have a flag that determines whether the tiles in front of the character are going to be overlapping the object (in other words, is the tile "flat" or is it high enough to potentially obscure the object above it). While this might make the code longer, I would think that it would make it draw the object quicker (unless of course it's behind something, but I think the slight reduction of speed there would be worth the increase of speed in the other case).
14
« on: September 02, 2009, 06:23:49 pm »
Well, that's why I've never used libraries and don't use basic.
Edit: (sorry to anyone who was offended by this statement. It wasn't meant that way)
15
« on: September 02, 2009, 06:21:13 pm »
Anyways, I'm pretty sure I did not include any undocumented instructions - I would surely have remembered doing so.
|
Show Posts