I'm sure a lot of you know that I dropped the programming scene some years ago but I do occasionally poke my nose in and tinker around in the languages.
However, I'm at a loss. Mostly a logical one. Have you ever commented out whole segments of code? Here's an example. I'm thinking that if I un-comment the second, third & fourth highlighted segments, as well as other segments not in the pastebin, the code should work as I want it.
As for the first highlight, I'm not sure what that does...
What you are looking at is source (main.c) of a Canon XTi (400D) Firmware Exploit I downloaded a few days ago. The firmware works wonderfully. Except, ISO16-80 doesn't work. The camera recognizes the values and adjusts the exposure accordingly except the imaging censor shoots at the value plus another 100, so ISO16 becomes ISO116, while ISO125 stays 125.
At first I thought that camera was doing a cheap test of something like
Code:
But clearly, that doesn't seem all that practical.
Back to the original question, any insight as to why someone would comment out portions of code? There are larger portions commented out, but they aren't relevant to my interests.
As far as screwing up my camera goes, I believe I'm safe. The exploit is placed on the CF card and I modified the CF card to be bootable so the camera will boot this exploit from the card rather than installing it onto itself.
However, I'm at a loss. Mostly a logical one. Have you ever commented out whole segments of code? Here's an example. I'm thinking that if I un-comment the second, third & fourth highlighted segments, as well as other segments not in the pastebin, the code should work as I want it.
As for the first highlight, I'm not sure what that does...
What you are looking at is source (main.c) of a Canon XTi (400D) Firmware Exploit I downloaded a few days ago. The firmware works wonderfully. Except, ISO16-80 doesn't work. The camera recognizes the values and adjusts the exposure accordingly except the imaging censor shoots at the value plus another 100, so ISO16 becomes ISO116, while ISO125 stays 125.
At first I thought that camera was doing a cheap test of something like
Code:
If ISO < 100
ISO = ISO + 100
Back to the original question, any insight as to why someone would comment out portions of code? There are larger portions commented out, but they aren't relevant to my interests.
As far as screwing up my camera goes, I believe I'm safe. The exploit is placed on the CF card and I modified the CF card to be bootable so the camera will boot this exploit from the card rather than installing it onto itself.