DescentDevelopers
Remove pragma ignoring -Wnarrowing
#21 turned off the -Wnarrowing compiler warning in the file libmve/snd8to16.h to enable building on Linux. The short array snd_8to16 uses values that exceed signed short limits.
Figure out a way to remove the pragma, either by increasing the array size to 4-byte ints or clamping values to [-32768;32767]
Will this work for clamping?
#include <stdint.h>
// Clamp values
int16_t clamp(int32_t value) {
if (value < -32768)
return -32768;
else if (value > 32767)
return 32767;
else
return (int16_t)value;
}
signed short snd_8to16[256] = {
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27,
28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41,
42, 43, 47, 51, 56, 61, 66, 72, 79, 86, 94, 102, 112, 122,
133, 145, 158, 173, 189, 206, 225, 245, 267, 292, 318, 348, 379, 414,
452, 493, 538, 587, 640, 699, 763, 832, 908, 991, 1081, 1180, 1288, 1405,
1534, 1673, 1826, 1993, 2175, 2373, 2590, 2826, 3084, 3365, 3672, 4008, 4373, 4772,
5208, 5683, 6202, 6767, 7385, 8059, 8794, 9597, 10472, 11428, 12471, 13609, 14851, 16206,
17685, 19298, 21060, 22981, 25078, 27367, 29864, 32589, 35563, 38808, 42350, 46214, 50431, 55033,
60055, 65535, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768,
-32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768, -32768};
Will this work for clamping?
That just clamps everything, but this needs careful testing to see if the code is actually clamping or wrapping around, even incorrectly.
We need to figure out precisely what the array is used for, and what the best solution is: clamping, re-interpolate all values in the short range, controlling overflow etc. I opened the issue to point out the problem, but it needs analysis. For example jumping from 65535 to -32768 might not be what the game intends
The comment in snd8to16.h still has the original generation algorithm, and using it with std::clamp() like this
recreate_snd8to16.cpp
#include <stdio.h>
#include <math.h>
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
int main(void)
{
signed int snd_8to16[256];
int i;
for (i=0; i<44; ++i) {
snd_8to16[i] = i;
}
for (i=44; i<128; ++i) {
snd_8to16[i] = std::clamp( (int)floor(pow(65535,i/127.0)+.5),
(int)std::numeric_limits<short>::min(), (int)std::numeric_limits<short>::max());
}
for (i=1; i<128; ++i) {
snd_8to16[256-i] = -snd_8to16[i];
}
snd_8to16[128] = snd_8to16[129];
int c = 1;
for (signed short s : snd_8to16) {
std::cout << std::setfill(' ') << std::setw(6) << s << ", ";
if (c++ % 14 == 0) {
std::cout << std::endl;
}
}
std::cout << '\n';
}
results in:
0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27,
28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41,
42, 43, 47, 51, 56, 61, 66, 72, 79, 86, 94, 102, 112, 122,
133, 145, 158, 173, 189, 206, 225, 245, 267, 292, 318, 348, 379, 414,
452, 493, 538, 587, 640, 699, 763, 832, 908, 991, 1081, 1180, 1288, 1405,
1534, 1673, 1826, 1993, 2175, 2373, 2590, 2826, 3084, 3365, 3672, 4008, 4373, 4772,
5208, 5683, 6202, 6767, 7385, 8059, 8794, 9597, 10472, 11428, 12471, 13609, 14851, 16206,
17685, 19298, 21060, 22981, 25078, 27367, 29864, 32589, 32767, 32767, 32767, 32767, 32767, 32767,
32767, 32767, -32767, -32767, -32767, -32767, -32767, -32767, -32767, -32767, -32767, -32589, -29864, -27367,
-25078, -22981, -21060, -19298, -17685, -16206, -14851, -13609, -12471, -11428, -10472, -9597, -8794, -8059,
-7385, -6767, -6202, -5683, -5208, -4772, -4373, -4008, -3672, -3365, -3084, -2826, -2590, -2373,
-2175, -1993, -1826, -1673, -1534, -1405, -1288, -1180, -1081, -991, -908, -832, -763, -699,
-640, -587, -538, -493, -452, -414, -379, -348, -318, -292, -267, -245, -225, -206,
-189, -173, -158, -145, -133, -122, -112, -102, -94, -86, -79, -72, -66, -61,
-56, -51, -47, -43, -42, -41, -40, -39, -38, -37, -36, -35, -34, -33,
-32, -31, -30, -29, -28, -27, -26, -25, -24, -23, -22, -21, -20, -19,
-18, -17, -16, -15, -14, -13, -12, -11, -10, -9, -8, -7, -6, -5,
-4, -3, -2, -1
Then someone has to test-listen to the movies to verify :)
Since we are replacing libmve (really need to do that soon), is this issue needed?