[GregoryRasputin]

Originally Posted by Nicolas19 Why @BwE does not Have developers tag(GREEN)?

Its in the process......



@3absiso
Nice Avatar

[3absiso]

Originally Posted by GregoryRasputin Its in the process...... @3absiso Nice Avatar

Thanx
hope the world will understand

[sinsizer]

@BwE
I don´t know what you are doing at the statistic calculating part. But for only calculating it takes way to long.

I did some further testing for this. Written in C# and it took only a few milliseconds. You are writing nativ c++ I think, so it could be much faster than the following managed example:

Click here to see full text

Download
http://temp-share.com/show/dPf3L638W

Sourceproject
http://temp-share.com/show/Pf3Yq8tM2

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Data;
using System.Drawing;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
using System.Windows.Forms;
using System.IO;
using System.Diagnostics;

namespace dumpstatistic
{
    public partial class Form1 : Form
    {
        public Form1()
        {
            InitializeComponent();
        }

        private void button1_DragEnter(object sender, DragEventArgs e)
        {
            e.Effect = DragDropEffects.All;
        }

        private void button1_DragDrop(object sender, DragEventArgs e)
        {
            double countff = 0;
            double count00 = 0;
            double countother = 0;
            Stopwatch sw = new Stopwatch();
            sw.Start();
            string[] test = (string[])e.Data.GetData(DataFormats.FileDrop);

            byte[] bytes = File.ReadAllBytes(test[0]);

            for (int i = 0; i < bytes.Length; i++)
            {
                if (bytes[i] == 0xFF)
                {
                     countff += 1;
                }

                else if (bytes[i] == 0x00)
                {
                    count00 += 1;
                }
                else if (bytes[i] != 0x00 || bytes[i] != 0xFF)
                {
                    countother += 1;
                }

            }
            countff = countff / bytes.Length * 100;
            count00 = count00 / bytes.Length * 100;
            countother = countother / 256 / bytes.Length * 100;
            textBox2.Text = countff.ToString("0.00") + "%";
            textBox1.Text = count00.ToString("0.00") + "%";
            textBox3.Text = countother.ToString("0.00") + "%";
            sw.Stop();
            label4.Text = sw.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds.ToString() + " ms";
        }
    }
}

Calculating others is wrong! To lazy to iterate through all 256 possible bytes But even if I do, it should take only milliseconds.

[WalangAlam]

Thanks much BwE for this. VERY nice tools just used it a while ago!
norpatch says ros0 and ros1 are unknown but this validators says ALL Green. Flashed and downgraded my PS3 just fine.

[BwE]

Originally Posted by sinsizer I don´t know what you are doing at the statistic calculating part. But for only calculating it takes way to long. I did some further testing for this. Written in C# and it took only a few milliseconds. You are writing nativ c++ I think, so it could be much faster than the following managed example: --- Calculating others is wrong! To lazy to iterate through all 256 possible bytes But even if I do, it should take only milliseconds.

I know, its a problem. I grab everything and do it differently. I have been too lazy to rebuild it, but I will very soon as I have already done similar. Also, what do you mean wrong? The results are fine.

Originally Posted by sinsizer Did some testing, filled 48byte with FF in bootldr:

That's because YOU filled it. But regardless, that will be detected in the next version.

[playerkp420]

18.25% for 00's is normal, correct? I have done many with that statistic. I think the wiki is just not updated yet?

It seems that it is always ofw 4.31 dumps. So I assume it is just something that changed with that update.

[baileyscream]

Originally Posted by sinsizer @BwE I don´t know what you are doing at the statistic calculating part. But for only calculating it takes way to long. I did some further testing for this. Written in C# and it took only a few milliseconds. You are writing nativ c++ I think, so it could be much faster than the following managed example: Calculating others is wrong! To lazy to iterate through all 256 possible bytes But even if I do, it should take only milliseconds.

takes to long??
its a damn site faster than doing it all by hand.
personaly if it gives a 100% acurate verify / fail at the end then i dont care if it takes it hours (it doesnt btw )
the most important thing is that the end user has a valid dump before he attempts to do anything with it.

@BwE
this version boots up for me. thanks for the fix.

so just to comfirm
win 7 32x works

is this now a fully recognised validator?

if so i can change my validation steps for this tool.


1 down 2 to come

[sinsizer]

Originally Posted by BwE Also, what do you mean wrong? The results are fine.

I mean that the calculation for "others" in my example is wrong

Originally Posted by BwE That's because YOU filled it. But regardless, that will be detected in the next version.

It doesn´t matter if I filled it or it´s an actual reading error. If the "Data Offsets" gets checked for FF repetitions it must be recognized.

Don´t get me wrong your tool is great

[baileyscream]

@BwE


are the bellow errors normal
...................................................................................

..................................................................................

.................................................................................

..................................................................................
i can e-mail you the dump if you want to see the whole output

[BwE]

Originally Posted by playerkp420 18.25% for 00's is normal, correct? I have done many with that statistic. I think the wiki is just not updated yet? It seems that it is always ofw 4.31 dumps. So I assume it is just something that changed with that update.

< 18.38
< 18.24

@baileyscream

Fully recognised validator? What the hell is that supposed to mean?

Weird how now it works for you, I did not really change that much to how it runs.

@sinsizer

As I said, next version will check it differently. Its only checking what's been defined.

@baileyscream (again)

3.65 8005B653D1A28FC9592145DC33DFA64F MISSING!

This is why I asked for dumps before Normally my validator would still cover it if I don't have all of its details - but I guess not this time. I will have to add it to the next version.

PM the dump if you wish