reimplement: SHC_3BB0A8C1_0x0047B060 structure and register issue#119
Draft
TheRedDaemon wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
reimplement: SHC_3BB0A8C1_0x0047B060 structure and register issue#119TheRedDaemon wants to merge 1 commit into
TheRedDaemon wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
TheRedDaemon
force-pushed
the
reimpl/SHC_3BB0A8C1_0x0047B060
branch
from
6114e84 to
f5d77a1
Compare
TheRedDaemon
force-pushed
the
reimpl/SHC_3BB0A8C1_0x0047B060
branch
from
f5d77a1 to
12ef8bf
Compare
TheRedDaemon
changed the title
gynt
approved these changes
Jun 23, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Removed the open flags, since Windows provides MACROs for them.
This function does not seem to be compatible with the bitfields, but even if I use an int, the last "loopCount" usage is still optimized to an 16bit mov instead of the "and 0xffff".Yet still, even if I assume they used a plain int, I would still be confused regarding the bit compares, since that is horrible to use. Maybe they used helper macros? I managed to make the other cases work so far, increasing my confusion.While it seems they are not compatible with bit fields, certain changes to the structure of the code cause specific parts to be properly handled like in the original. Even the current case contains one such compare.
In any case, the function has some non-fitting register usage even if the bitfield usage is transformed, so something is wrong anyway.
The logic itself should be sound.