Last commit read bit 31 of a tie vertex region's first word as "VIF code word"
and told a two-encoding story on it. The split is real; the identification is
wrong, and I checked it before building anything on top.
Walking those regions as VIF packets, levels 0-2, 914 records:
walk reaches the region end 17
walk dies after exactly ONE packet 1,571
packets before dying: min 0, median 1, max 4
tfrag walks VIF the same way -- VifCode::decode, then num * 4 payload words -- and
reaches the end of its lists every time. So the walk is not the problem; these
regions are not VIF packet streams. Bit 31 is set on whatever this word actually
is, and that is still unknown.
The specific thing that made me overreach: I quoted 0xf5c1a3c5 as "a VIF code
word, cmd 0x75 num 193" and treated that as establishing the format. Decoding one
word as a packet header says nothing about whether the next 193 words are its
payload. Here they are not -- the walk dies immediately after.
This is the third time in this area that one plausible word produced a confident
story: the 305x class-ID slot, the UV-corner texcoords, and now this. All three
shared a shape -- a single readable item at the head of a population, treated as
evidence about the whole. The bit is the only thing the two kinds reliably
differ on, so it stays; the name goes.
The test now asserts BOTH the split and the walk failure, which is the part worth
keeping. If these ever do turn out to be VIF, the test fails and says so, rather
than two findings drifting apart silently -- which is how "half VIF, half flat"
would have sat in the docs indefinitely.
Docs corrected in both roadmap and format file, including the quoted example.
258 tests.
ReaperOfVeriod
ec433e3341