mirror of
https://github.com/Druthulu/BFM-decomp
synced 2026-09-27 14:02:04 -04:00
Drew T
bc04f65562
FLEET 96.29% fn / 94.2% instr / 88.9% distinct, R22 140/140 twice. Session banked 7 wave-6 heads + 25 propagated siblings = +10,616 instructions (12,368,236 -> 12,378,852; the digest delta matches the hand-derivation exactly). wave-metrics.md gains Findings 5 and 6: - RANK WAVES BY INSTRUCTIONS, NOT HEADS. Wave 6 banked ~45% more instructions than wave 5 while banking less than half as many heads, because a bigger head carries more instructions AND its family propagates at the same cost per sibling (func_8017FEE0: ONE 299-ins head -> 4,485 ins across 15 siblings, ~0 agent tokens). The metric to beat is POOL REALISATION (21%), not bank rate — and wave 6's bank rate is NOT comparable to waves 3-5 because the difficulty knob moved deliberately (median target 438 ins vs 143, mostly has_mid_jr). - A WAVE TALLY IS A COVERAGE CLAIM and needs its own assertion. The 9 unbanked drafts are diagnosed and preserved, and 6 of them are ONE class worth cracking first: `undefined reference` to a sibling that IS defined in the overlay but only via a definition-side __asm__ alias (§37/§124) — the carve repartitions the object and separates the call site from the alias definition. One fix frees 6 already-paid-for drafts and will recur in every carve-heavy wave. The other two are genuine near-misses (close=47 REGALLOC-PERM, close=370). Tooling committed for reuse: w6_pool.py (the pool derivation, now a script), w6_diag.py (runs the REAL gate path — s36_capture.py splices without the carve and is wrong for jr targets), w6_jtbl_prop.py (carve-path propagation with the per-family commit jtbl_family_bank requires).