- 📝 Posted:
- 🚚 Summary of:
- P0227, P0228
- ⌨ Commits:
4f85326...bfd24c6,bfd24c6...739e1d8- 💰 Funded by:
- nrook, [Anonymous]
- 🏷 Tags:
Starting the year with a delivery that wasn't delayed until the last
day of the month for once, nice! Still, very soon
and
high-maintenance
did not go well together…
It definitely wasn't Sara's fault though. As you would expect from a Stage 1 Boss, her code was no challenge at all. Most of the TH02, TH04, and TH05 bosses follow the same overall structure, so let's introduce a new table to replace most of the boilerplate overview text:
| Phase # | Patterns | HP boundary | Timeout condition | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
(Entrance) | 4,650 | 288 frames | ||
| 2 | 4 | 2,550 | 2,568 frames | (= 32 patterns) | |
| 3 | 4 | 450 | 5,296 frames | (= 24 patterns) | |
| 4 | 1 | 0 | 1,300 frames | ||
| Total | 9 | 9,452 frames | |||
- In Phases 2 and 3, Sara cycles between waiting, moving randomly for a
fixed 28 frames, and firing a random pattern among the 4 phase-specific
ones. The pattern selection makes sure to never
pick any pattern twice in a row. Both phases contain spiral patterns that
only differ in the clockwise or counterclockwise turning direction of the
spawner; these directions are treated as individual unrelated patterns, so
it's possible for the "same" pattern to be fired multiple times in a row
with a flipped direction.
The two phases also differ in the wait and pattern durations:- In Phase 2, the wait time starts at 64 frames and decreases by 12 frames after the first 5 patterns each, ending on a minimum of 4 frames. In Phase 3, it's a constant 16 frames instead.
- All Phase 2 patterns are fired for 28 frames, after a 16-frame gather animation. The Phase 3 pattern time starts at 80 frames and increases by 24 frames for the first 6 patterns, ending at 200 frames for all later ones.
- Phase 4 consists of the single laser corridor pattern with additional random bullets every 16 frames.
And that's all the gameplay-relevant detail that ZUN put into Sara's code. It doesn't even make sense to describe the remaining
patterns in depth, as their groups can significantly change between
difficulties and rank values. The
📝 general code structure of TH05 bosses
won't ever make for good-code, but Sara's code is just a
lesser example of what I already documented for Shinki.
So, no bugs, no unused content, only inconsequential bloat to be found here,
and less than 1 push to get it done… That makes 9 PC-98 Touhou bosses
decompiled, with 22 to go, and gets us over the sweet 50% overall
finalization mark! 🎉 And sure, it might be possible to pass through the
lasers in Sara's final pattern, but the boss script just controls the
origin, angle, and activity of lasers, so any quirk there would be part of
the laser code… wait, you can do what?!?
TH05 expands TH04's one-off code for Yuuka's Master and Double Sparks into a
more featureful laser system, and Sara is the first boss to show it off.
Thus, it made sense to look at it again in more detail and finalize the code
I had purportedly
📝 reverse-engineered over 4 years ago.
That very short delivery notice already hinted at a very time-consuming
future finalization of this code, and that prediction certainly came true.
On the surface, all of the low-level laser ray rendering and
collision detection code is undecompilable: It uses the SI and
DI registers without Turbo C++'s safety backups on the stack,
and its helper functions take their input and output parameters from
convenient registers, completely ignoring common calling conventions. And
just to raise the confusion even further, the code doesn't just set
these registers for the helper function calls and then restores their
original values, but permanently shifts them via additions and
subtractions. Unfortunately, these convenient registers also include the
BP base pointer to the stack frame of a function… and shifting
that register throws any intuition behind accessed local variables right out
of the window for a good part of the function, requiring a correctly shifted
view of the stack frame just to make sense of it again.
How could such code even have been written?! This
goes well beyond the already wrong assumption that using more stack space is
somehow bad, and straight into the territory of self-inflicted pain.
So while it's not a lot of instructions, it's quite dense and really hard to
follow. This code would really benefit from a decompilation that
anchors all this madness as much as possible in existing C++ structures… so
let's decompile it anyway? 
Doing so would involve emitting lots of raw machine code bytes to hide the
SI and DI registers from the compiler, but I
already had a certain
📝 batshit insane compiler bug workaround abstraction
lying around that could make such code more readable. Hilariously, it only
took this one additional use case for that abstraction to reveal itself as
premature and way too complicated. Expanding
the core idea into a full-on x86 instruction generator ended up simplifying
the code structure a lot. All we really want there is a way to set all
potential parameters to e.g. a specific form of the MOV
instruction, which can all be expressed as the parameters to a force-inlined
__emit__() function. Type safety can help by providing
overloads for different operand widths here, but there really is no need for
classes, templates, or explicit specialization of templates based on
classes. We only need a couple of enums with opcode, register,
and prefix constants from the x86 reference documentation, and a set of
associated macros that token-paste pseudoregisters onto the prefixes of
these enum constants.
And that's how you get a custom compile-time assembler in a 1994 C++
compiler and expand the limits of decompilability even further. What's even
truly left now? Self-modifying code, layout tricks that can't be replicated
with regularly structured control flow… and that's it. That leaves quite a
few functions I previously considered undecompilable to be revisited once I
get to work on making this game more portable.
With that, we've turned the low-level laser code into the expected horrible
monstrosity that exposes all the hidden complexity in those few ASM
instructions. The high-level part should be no big deal now… except that
we're immediately bombarded with Fixup overflow errors at link
time? Oh well, time to finally learn the true way of fixing this highly
annoying issue in a second new piece of decompilation tech – and one
that might actually be useful for other x86 Real Mode retro developers at
that.
Earlier in the RE history of TH04 and TH05, I often wrote about the need to
split the two original code segments into multiple segments within two
groups, which makes it possible to slot in code from different
translation units at arbitrary places within the original segment. If we
don't want to define a unique segment name for each of these slotted-in
translation units, we need a way to set custom segment and group names in C
land. Turbo C++ offers two #pragmas for that:
#pragma option -zCsegment -zPgroup– preferred in most cases as it's equivalent to setting the default segment and group via the command line, but can only be used at the beginning of a translation unit, before the first non-preprocessor and non-comment C language token#pragma codeseg segment <group>– necessary if a translation unit needs to emit code into two or more segments
For the most part, these #pragmas work well, but they seemed to
not help much when it came to calling near functions declared
in different segments within the same group. It took a bit of trial and
error to figure out what was actually going on in that case, but there
is a clear logic to it:
- Symbols are allocated to the segment and group that's active during their first appearance, no matter whether that appearance is a declaration or definition. Any later appearance of the function in a different segment is ignored.
- The linker calculates the 16-bit offsets of such references relative to
the symbol's declared segment, not its actual one. Turbo C++ does
not show an error or warning if the declared and actual segments are
different, as referencing the same symbol from multiple segments is a valid
use case. The linker merely throws the
Fixup overflowerror if the calculated distance exceeds 64 KiB and thus couldn't possibly fit within anearreference. With a wrong segment declaration though, your code can be incorrect long before a fixup hits that limit.
Summarized in code:
#pragma option -zCfoo_TEXT -zPfoo
void bar(void);
void near qux(void); // defined somewhere else, maybe in a different segment
#pragma codeseg baz_TEXT baz
// Despite the segment change in the line above, this function will still be
// put into `foo_TEXT`, the active segment during the first appearance of the
// function name.
void bar(void) {
}
// This function hasn't been declared yet, so it will go into `baz_TEXT` as
// expected.
void baz(void) {
// This `near` function pointer will be calculated by subtracting the
// flat/linear address of qux() inside the binary from the base address
// of qux()'s declared segment, i.e., `foo_TEXT`.
void (near *ptr_to_qux)(void) = qux;
}
So yeah, you might have to put #pragma codeseg into your
headers to tell the linker about the correct segment of a
near function in advance. 🤯 This is an important insight for
everyone using this compiler, and I'm shocked that none of the Borland C++
books documented the interaction of code segment definitions and
near references at least at this level of clarity. The TASM
manuals did have a few pages on the topic of groups, but that syntax
obviously doesn't apply to a C compiler. Fixup overflows in particular are
such a common error and really deserved better than the unhelpful 🤷
of an explanation that ended up in the User's Guide. Maybe this whole
technique of custom code segment names was considered arcane even by 1993,
judging from the mere three sentences that #pragma codeseg was
documented with? Still, it must have been common knowledge among Amusement
Makers, because they couldn't have built these exact binaries without
knowing about these details. This is the true solution to
📝 any issues involving references to near functions,
and I'm glad to see that ZUN did not in fact lie to the compiler. 👍
OK, but now the remaining laser code compiles, and we get to write
C++ code to draw some hitboxes during the two collision-detected states of
each laser. These confirm what the low-level code from earlier already
uncovered: Collision detection against lasers is done by testing a
12×12-pixel box at every 16 pixels along the length of a laser, which leaves
obvious 4-pixel gaps at regular intervals that the player can just pass
through. 
This adds
📝 yet
📝 another
📝 quirk to the growing list of quirks that
were either intentional or must have been deliberately left in the game
after their initial discovery. This is what constants were invented for, and
there really is no excuse for not using them – especially during
intoxicated coding, and/or if you don't have a compile-time abstraction for
Q12.4 literals.
Using subpixel coordinates in collision detection also introduces a slight inaccuracy into any hitbox visualization recorded in-engine on a 16-color PC-98. Since we have to render discrete pixels, we cannot exactly place a Q12.4 coordinate in the 93.75% of cases where the fractional part is non-zero. This is why pretty much every laser segment hitbox in the video above shows up as 7×7 rather than 6×6: The actual W×H area of each box is 13 pixels smaller, but since the hitbox lies between these pixels, we cannot indicate where it lies exactly, and have to err on the side of caution. It's also why Reimu's box slightly changes size as she moves: Her non-diagonal movement speed is 3.5 pixels per frame, and the constant focused movement in the video above halves that to 1.75 pixels, making her end up on an exact pixel every 4 frames. Looking forward to the glorious future of displays that will allow us to scale up the playfield to 16× its original pixel size, thus rendering the game at its exact internal resolution of 6144×5888 pixels. Such a port would definitely add a lot of value to the game…
The remaining high-level laser code is rather unremarkable for the most
part, but raises one final interesting question: With no explicitly defined
limit, how wide can a laser be? Looking at the laser structure's 1-byte
width field and the unsigned comparisons all throughout the update and
rendering code, the answer seems to be an obvious 255 pixels. However, the
laser system also contains an automated shrinking state, which can be most
notably seen in Mai's wheel pattern. This state shrinks a laser by 2 pixels
every 2 frames until it reached a width of 0. This presents a problem with
odd widths, which would fall below 0 and overflow back to 255 due to the
unsigned nature of this variable. So rather than, I don't know, treating
width values of 0 as invalid and stopping at a width of 1, or even adding a
condition for that specific case, the code just performs a signed
comparison, effectively limiting the width of a shrinkable laser to a
maximum of 127 pixels. This small signedness
inconsistency now forces the distinction between shrinkable and
non-shrinkable lasers onto every single piece of code that uses lasers. Yet
another instance where
📝 aiming for a cinematic 30 FPS look
made the resulting code much more complicated than if ZUN had just evenly
spread out the subtraction across 2 frames. 🤷
Oh well, it's not as if any of the fixed lasers in the original scripts came
close to any of these limits. Moving lasers are much more streamlined and
limited to begin with: Since they're hardcoded to 6 pixels, the game can
safely assume that they're always thinner than the 28 pixels they get
gradually widened to during their decay animation.
Finally, in case you were missing a mention of hitboxes in the previous paragraph: Yes, the game always uses the aforementioned 12×12 boxes, regardless of a laser's width.
That was what, 50% of this blog post just being about complications that made laser difficult for no reason? Next up: The first TH01 Anniversary Edition build, where I finally get to reap the rewards of having a 100% decompiled game and write some good code for once.