Difference between revisions of "User:Buddha^/GSoC2007-ProjectDiary"

User:Buddha^/GSoC2007-ProjectDiary (view source)

73 bytes added , 21:02, 28 June 2007

Did some rewording of 2007-06-28's text.

417

edits

@@ Line 358: / Line 358: @@
 == 2007-06-28 (Thursday) - Reverse engineered AGI256's and AGI256-2's blitCel-function to a C subroutine ==
-Okay... so blitCel-function was the last function I hadn't gone through in quite a bit of detail.
+Okay... so agi256BlitCel-function was the last function in AGIOBJS.OVL that I hadn't already reverse
-And I have to say... woah, that took time. Like, many, hours. But it was worth it, now I can say
+engineered into a C subroutine. And I have to say... woah, reverse engineering agi256BlitCel-function
-that I've almost 100% reverse engineered AGI256 and AGI256-2 hacks... there's one little bit
+took time. Like, many, hours. But it was worth it, now I can say that I've almost 100% reverse engineered
-of data near AGI.EXE's start (Offsets 0x265 - 0x277 in the EXE-file) that are still a mystery to me.
+AGI256 and AGI256-2 hacks... there's one little bit of data near AGI.EXE's start (Offsets 0x265 - 0x277
-I tried putting zeroes in their place and it still ran so it may be that they aren't needed.
+in the EXE-file) that are still a mystery to me. I tried putting zeroes in their place and it still ran
-Also I don't really know what's the usage (If any) of the relative call (db 0xE8 0x49 0x00)
+so it may be that they aren't needed. Also I don't really know what's the usage (If any) of the relative
-at 0x262 - 0x264 in AGI256's and AGI256-2's AGI.EXE.
+call (db 0xE8 0x49 0x00) at 0x262 - 0x264 in AGI256's and AGI256-2's AGI.EXE.