Author Topic: .52 Patterns Taking on the Same Name? Weird (Read 7771 times)

Really Weird Person · « **on:** May 29, 2008, 07:19:46 »

That is weird. When I named my first and twelfth patterns, the 257th and 268th ones were named the same thing. I looked through all of my patterns and those are the only two with that name (other than the first and twelfth ones, which should have names). When I removed the names in the original patterns, the names were also removed in the other two. The same thing happened when I readded them. Has this happened to anyone else? I do not think that it is a big deal, it is just strange, that's all.

Saga Musix · « **Reply #1 on:** May 29, 2008, 10:38:26 »

sounds like a BYTE overflow...

bvanoudtshoorn · « **Reply #2 on:** May 29, 2008, 12:50:09 »

More than 268 patterns?! I'm impressed! I don't think that anyone expected someone to go that high up, so I too think that it's an overflow (wraparound) error.

anboi · « **Reply #3 on:** May 29, 2008, 14:47:45 »

yeah, sounds like it might be something dodgy, presumably you're using the mptm format? what version? i'll try to have a look later on as i occasionally go over the .it limit and switch to .mptm so it might affect me.

Really Weird Person · « **Reply #4 on:** May 29, 2008, 15:47:21 »

The song that has this weirdness is 364 patterns long, but I also have a song that is 3,588 patterns long. That one took some time!

Really Weird Person · « **Reply #5 on:** May 29, 2008, 15:52:15 »

I used the mptm format, since the it is limited to 240. I am using version .52 (at least those are the last two numbers the whole thing would be 1.17.02.52). Try this though, a song with 80 someodd thousand patterns. Good luck with that one (unless, of course, you have a bizarre version that does not limit position jumps to FF or a version where the x parameter effect (#xx) affects it). :lol:

Relabsoluness · « **Reply #6 on:** May 29, 2008, 19:00:27 »

Thanks a lot RWP. While the pattern name bug might just be minor inconvenience, this pointed out a profound problem that needs to be solved.

aGIANTpupafish · « **Reply #7 on:** May 29, 2008, 19:56:43 »

might i suggest moving this to bug report?

anboi · « **Reply #8 on:** July 29, 2008, 07:18:08 »

i just ran into this issue - i don't often name patterns but had it today, couldn't work out a logical reason for this happening, my newly created pattern 357 took on the same name as 107, 362 took 106s name again... very odd! relabsoluness comments suggest it's something that you know what it is though? should i be worried that my file is so big? maybe i should get rid of some crap...! this was in .48 btw

LPChip · « **Reply #9 on:** July 29, 2008, 08:58:13 »

In RWP's case, the difference is exactly 256.

In Anboi's case, its 250. It almost seemed too good to be true, isn't it?

Really Weird Person · « **Reply #10 on:** July 29, 2008, 15:00:23 »

That means that it should double each time (512, 1,024, 2,048, …):lol:

Relabsoluness · « **Reply #11 on:** July 29, 2008, 19:38:22 »

Quote from: "anboi"

relabsoluness comments suggest it's something that you know what it is though?

If I remember correctly, the issue is only(?) with the GUI update so that if you set pattern name to some pattern with index > 255, it gets set correctly but is shown incorrectly. A fix will be in the next release.

Quote from: "anboi"

should i be worried that my file is so big?

While handling such a number of pattern should not be a problem, it nevertheless is good to keep in mind that the extended pattern range is rather new, experimental area.

Saga Musix · « **Reply #12 on:** May 17, 2009, 21:57:13 »

please confirm that this has been fixed in version 1.17.02.53.

LPChip · « **Reply #13 on:** July 22, 2009, 07:39:40 »

Based on this reply by PM, I'm closing the bug.

Quote from: "Really Weird Person"

I had forgotten about this until I saw the e-mail just a little bit ago. It would appear that the bug is indeed fixed. Thanks (though due to the pattern cut, I still do not use it much)