Yathosho

4th September 2009 23:56 UTC

cfg_fs_fps (Winamp.ini)
as i couldn't found it on the web, i thought i'd share this little spreadsheet with you. it basically describes how the value for cfg_fs_fps is calculated.

that value contains the avs settings of the following options:

-Display framerate counter (fullscreen)
-Suppress status text in windows
-Suppress title text in windows
-Suppress status text in fullscreen
-Suppress status text in fullscreen

simply add the values of each setting to get the value of cfg_fs_fps.

Yathosho

5th September 2009 14:52 UTC

cfg_speed
while i'm at it, let me also explain the value for cfg_speed. it stores both settings for the rendering performance in windowed and fullscreen mode. the lower the value, the higher the performance.

both performance sliders have 80 steps. for windowed performance, each step increases or decreases the value by 1 (1, 2, 3,..,80). for fullscreen performance, each step increases or decreases by the value of 256 (256, 512, 768, 1024,..,20480).

with both at lowest performance, cfg_speed will be at 20560, at highest performance a 0.

i don't know if why justin chose to store some values in seperate .ini entries and others combined in one. however, i'm obviously up to something and with no documentation available i decided to post this - without expecting that anyone ever needs this.

Yathosho

5th September 2009 16:44 UTC

cfg_fs_flip
the next one is a mystery to me, maybe someone else gets behind it. cfg_fs_flip stores wait for retrace (windowed & fullscreen), fast bpp conversion, and page flipping.

edit: it's probably i bug, cause it all would make sense if the value for "all on" was 16 (instead of 14): page flipping (1), wfr fullscreen (2), wfr windows (4), fast bpp (8).

edit2: still doesn't make much sense, maybe 14 is right and page flipping is -1?!

jheriko

7th September 2009 13:47 UTC

Sounds like bitfields: 14 = 1110

All on should be 15 (1111), it could be that page flipping is ignored if wait for raytrace is on... page flipping is a mysterious ancient hack that I can't really remember much about.

Storing bitfields in ini files does seem a bit fruitless though. Bitfields are for binary data... sticking them into something human readable where every extra character ( all the [ = etc ) wastes as much space as 8 bitfields is a bit of a micro optimisation.