You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I wanted to globally specify the bitfield order for a pattern I am working on, so I used the #pragma directive like specified in the docs.
Interestingly enough it should say that it's unsupported as I found out later fiddling around with reproducing the behavior, HOWEVER if you put #pragma endian little before, it doesn't do that. (probably due to crashing before being able to handle the error)
How can the issue be reproduced?
#pragma endian little
#pragma bitfield_order left_to_right
bitfield RECT{
nbits:5;
signed xmin:nbits;
signed xmax:nbits;
signed ymin:nbits;
signed ymax:nbits;
};
RECT rect_at_0x08 @ 0x08;
ImHex Version
1.35.4
ImHex Build Type
Nightly or built from sources
Installation type
MSI
Additional context?
There is no specific pattern of data causing the issue. This seems to just be an awkward hole in the logic from what I can gather.
In general I am left puzzled with bifield oder, as it only seems to produce the right output when I use 'be'. e.g. the attribute does not seem to work the same way and in general does not work well for my usecase, since my bitfield is variable in size.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Operating System
Windows
What's the issue you encountered?
I wanted to globally specify the bitfield order for a pattern I am working on, so I used the #pragma directive like specified in the docs.
Interestingly enough it should say that it's unsupported as I found out later fiddling around with reproducing the behavior, HOWEVER if you put #pragma endian little before, it doesn't do that. (probably due to crashing before being able to handle the error)
How can the issue be reproduced?
ImHex Version
1.35.4
ImHex Build Type
Installation type
MSI
Additional context?
There is no specific pattern of data causing the issue. This seems to just be an awkward hole in the logic from what I can gather.
In general I am left puzzled with bifield oder, as it only seems to produce the right output when I use 'be'. e.g. the attribute does not seem to work the same way and in general does not work well for my usecase, since my bitfield is variable in size.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: