Need Help Re: Displaying the Volume in 10% increments using Bitmap Strips

[[Saint]]

How can I go about getting a Sim that works on say...at least 3.4 then?
Is one freely available? or would it have to be compiled from scratch? as that would be beyond My current capabilities.

When I replace the .rockbox DIR inthe SIM I'm using at the moment, it worked...and not only did it appear to work, it reports as the current build during the boot (obviously in error) which led Me to believe it was possible to do so...(obviously in error)

I don't use the SIM for anything other that testing out My WPS's....is there another APP I may be able to use to debug My WPS code?
It would be useful.


I realise that the problems arise from the fact that this is all voluntary work, compiled for a freeware project.

But shouldn't that mean We're all in the interests of helping out whomever, whenever We can?

Instead of going out of Our ways to point out accidental errors, wander off topic, and undermine the original intent of the post?

I've stated more than once that My understanding of the workings of RockBox is limited, and that I am more than willing to be corrected if wrong...but being deliberately made to feel ignorant isn't something I'm as willing to take on board.

Wouldn't it in fact be *SOOOOO* much easier to say "No, You are mistaken or are in error in that belief" than saying "Nope...wrong (insert arrogant remark to assert superiority here)?"


Sincerely,
[St.]

[Llorean]

Are you sure you aren't interpreting "and here's how you can do it right in the future, and why it's important to make this effort" as "attempts to assert superiority?"

You're the one reading tone into this, whereas this IS all important to any future attempts you make to seek help. Am I supposed to NOT point these out even though you still haven't posted the specific build numbers you're using in the players (that are also showing this problem)?

Yes, it's a volunteer effort. But you also need to be prepared to provide the information necessary from your side for people to help you rather than taking people saying "we need this information, and here's why" as a personal insult of some sort.

I wasn't trying to point out an accidental error - I had no way to know it was an accident until you told me. I could only in good faith assume you honestly meant the number you typed and weren't simply throwing something out there because in the forum guidelines it's specifically said that you'll be asked for your build number and should generally just give it in advance.

This isn't off-topic: You mentioned the error you're getting with limits within the WPS. If we're to discover what's happening, we need to know the whole conditions it's occurring under. Specifically, this means getting you to report a revision number you've tested it with that's much newer than 3.3.

As far as I know the original topic of "how do I do this" was answered by me many posts ago, so all that's really left is the limit issue.

As to simply saying "no you're wrong in that belief", what good does that do without an explanation? You need to, at the very least, be told how it actually works so that you don't try some second or third wrong thing next, right?

[[Saint]]

Llorean,

I've read the posts from the beginning to now and can't find you once asking in plain english for the build number on the players I am using......however

it's r23824

On the topic of still not posting things:

How can I go about getting a Sim that works on say...at least 3.4 then?
Is one freely available?

However,

Can we agree to disagree on certain things...as all humans will do from time to time? or I can see us getting off on the wrong foot as we're obviously both fairly empassioned people and it's not My intention to get under anyone's skin, or to let anyone else get under mine.

Tone is indeed hard to convey in text, so I do apologise, the level of detail gone into whilst correcting My mistake led Me to believe it went past pointing out an error, and into the territory of "rubbing salt into the wound".

I freely appologise



Sincerely,
[St.]

[Llorean]

If you need a newer sim, yes you will need to compile it for yourself. Have you read the instructions? It's really not very hard.

Is that 23824 on a 1st gen Nano? Second gen Nano? Both? You mentioned having several players earlier. As well, how many tokens actually are in the file? If you reduce the size or number of images so that less total RAM is used, but don't change the number of tokens, does more stuff display?

Sims don't work "on" a specific version. As I've said already - the sim is a specific version of Rockbox. To clarify - it's designed to look and act similar to the Rockbox on that specific player, but it's a version made to run on the computer. The file "rockbox.ipod" is basically the the same as the .exe file for the simulator in terms of what it does. All of the plugins and codecs contain different information for the simulator than they do for the player.

[[Saint]]

Yes, the build is the same on all My players (r23824)

As for how many tokens are in the file....apart from saying "at the moment, slightly under 1023 (or if I tried to add another image or animation say....definitely 1023+)" and without sitting down and actually manually counting each individual token (which would be a nightmare) I'm not aware of a way to give you an exact number for the ammount of tokens used...

As for compiling My own Build for the SIM, yes, I have *looked* at the instructions....but I'm led to believe it'd be a lot easier if I were to be using a Linux OS, correct Me if I'm wrong.

Is there no such Util that will specifically debug a WPS?
It'd be of good use to Me and others I'd assume.

As for

If you reduce the size or number of images so that less total RAM is used, but don't change the number of tokens, does more stuff display?

I'm really not sure, as the error forced Me into drastically ruducing what I INTENDED to display onscreen, I don't belive so with what I'm experiencing, but I'll try to explain it this way....try to stay with me....

If I deliberately bloat the code that I have now that DOESN'T exceed the apparent token limits so that it DOES exceed the token limits, I start to get "Bitmap too large for Buffer" warnings in the SIM and random stuff on the WPS seems to break whereas the same bitmaps would previously not exceed the buffer if the code didn't esxceed the token limit. Does that make sense to you? sorry it's an ass-backward way to describe it....does this tell you if it's a RAM thing or not?

Don't 1st and 2nd Gen Nano's have differing ammounts of RAM, I mean doesn't the 2nd Gen have more?

I experience the same issues on both of My 1st and 2nd Gen Nano's

I've based the WPS around the limits I'm apparently hitting, and I'm reasonably happy with what I've ended up with compared to what I'd first imagined....so it's not a big deal, and I'm at about 99% completion in regards to releasing the WPS so if anything regarding this token limit thing gets worked out tomorrow say....I'd probably still release the WPS as is and use any advances that may come from this thread in that area to build another, better WPS....as opposed to waiting to release this one when it's so nearing completion...


Thanks for all your help,


Sincerely,
[St.]



EDIT
==================================================


To sum things up in My understanding....is it perhaps correct that the images and WPS code share the TOTAL AMMOUNT OF RAM and that less images would allow for more code, and less code would allow for more images?

Is this correct? as unfortunately, when it comes to the images being "animated" as opposed to "static" more images = WAY more code....so back to square one?

[Llorean]

What's happening in the old version of the SIM is more or less meaningless as it's code from half a year ago. I thought I explained this so I'm not sure why you're repeating to me what was happening with it.

The sim more or less is the tool for debugging this sort of thing, but you'll need an up to date one. It's only marginally easier to create one in linux (and in fact arguably VMWare is easier than native Linux since it comes with the cross compilers already set up). There's also the checkwps tool, but it would also require you to hand-compile it, and though I'm not certain, I'm pretty sure it's just the verification code from the simulator presented a different way.

As I said, the test you'd want to perform is getting it to fail to load everything (by as little as possible if you can), then significantly reducing the image size without changing the number of tokens so that you can see if the number of tokens really matters on its own, or if it's just a case of "more tokens means more RAM use" with you jumping to the conclusion that it's a token limit thing because of a six month old error message.

Basically, I need results from tests on current code before I make any more specific speculation, which requires you either build a simulator, or run more specific tests on the player.

And while I'm not sure the Nanos have different RAM amounts or not, the amount of memory reserved for the WPS isn't based on the total RAM but rather on the screen dimensions.

[Multiplex]

What I should of said is that I use that Simulator http://rasher.dk/rockbox/simulator-3.3/

Current - or at least very recent - Simulators are available here http://rasher.dk/rockbox/simulator/

If you need or want to build Rockbox or a simulator the VMWare image is very impressive and easy to work with (I get a source zip file rather than using SVN as my 'play' PC is not connected to the web) - I used it as an example of how we should provide a demo setup for a project here at work.
Guidance here http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/VMwareDevelopmentPlatform

Is there no such Util that will specifically debug a WPS?

That's just what a good number of folk use the simulator for...

Now, PLEASE get a recent Sim, so that we can get back to trying to help you get your WPS working and stop arguing about who said what to whom and whether percent or dB is the 'right' way of showing volume (which should always go up to 11 BTW) - Thanks :-)