v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.
Editing 40d Talk:Memory hacking
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in.
Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
You are editing a page for an older version of Dwarf Fortress ("Main" is the current version, not "40d"). Please make sure you intend to do this. If you are here by mistake, see the current page instead.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
# Has anyone attempted to decode the memory for the "Choose Fortress Location" screen? Being able to generate a list of all local areas with magma vents would be useful. [[User:Palin88|Palin88]] 20:09, 29 November 2007 (EST) | # Has anyone attempted to decode the memory for the "Choose Fortress Location" screen? Being able to generate a list of all local areas with magma vents would be useful. [[User:Palin88|Palin88]] 20:09, 29 November 2007 (EST) | ||
:: This is a great idea. I suggest going one step further : Give the user a list of options (say : magma, flux, thick forest, chasm, underground river, pit, etc), and logically AND all parts of the map that have those features. That would save people hours of looking for their perfect start location. [[User:Runspotrun|Runspotrun]] 19:25, 8 December 2007 (EST) | :: This is a great idea. I suggest going one step further : Give the user a list of options (say : magma, flux, thick forest, chasm, underground river, pit, etc), and logically AND all parts of the map that have those features. That would save people hours of looking for their perfect start location. [[User:Runspotrun|Runspotrun]] 19:25, 8 December 2007 (EST) | ||
− | |||
# It could be important to some people, but the formats are only correct assuming that the dwarf fortress binary is built using release config. Under debug config, std::string structure gains some more fat and the existing offset will be wrong. Not a prob now, but I think it is good to know. [[User:Sphr|Sphr]] | # It could be important to some people, but the formats are only correct assuming that the dwarf fortress binary is built using release config. Under debug config, std::string structure gains some more fat and the existing offset will be wrong. Not a prob now, but I think it is good to know. [[User:Sphr|Sphr]] | ||
− | |||
− | |||
== Version Identity == | == Version Identity == | ||
Line 53: | Line 50: | ||
:::::::::Don't get me wrong, it was in response to 0x517A5D's mentioning that checksum is all 0 in the pe header for the binaries. What I mean by messing up isn't necessarily due to deliberate attempts. It was referring to cases like this (though I find it strange that checksums are not updated automatically by filesystem). I think the timestamp method could work as well. Cheaper too. Just throwing out this discussion coz perviously, there is no shared info at all on version identification. So I'm just throwing ideas around to hope to hopefully "lure" out any better suggestions. [[User:Sphr|Sphr]] 2007 Dec 11 | :::::::::Don't get me wrong, it was in response to 0x517A5D's mentioning that checksum is all 0 in the pe header for the binaries. What I mean by messing up isn't necessarily due to deliberate attempts. It was referring to cases like this (though I find it strange that checksums are not updated automatically by filesystem). I think the timestamp method could work as well. Cheaper too. Just throwing out this discussion coz perviously, there is no shared info at all on version identification. So I'm just throwing ideas around to hope to hopefully "lure" out any better suggestions. [[User:Sphr|Sphr]] 2007 Dec 11 | ||
::::::::::Why would the system update an executables checksum in the header? --[[User:Rick|Rick]] 00:33, 11 December 2007 (EST) | ::::::::::Why would the system update an executables checksum in the header? --[[User:Rick|Rick]] 00:33, 11 December 2007 (EST) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |