pcmhacking.net

joukoy wrote:
Converting to MDI requires too much modifications.
I give up.
So, test 0.10.1 if possible.

I TRIED to give up, but I couldn't do that.
V 0.11.0 uses MDI
UI is almost totally rewritten (or copy-pasted)

It is just my opinion, but that mdi interface is much harder to work with. The tab design seems much better for that type of application. I hope you didn`t put too much effort in it, at least it was a good exercise for future developments.

I have been thinking for some auto table detection like maf, spark, ve for a generic ls1 bin, with some basic editor for the tables. It will be really cool and well suited within that mdi interface. I am still on the table detect algorithm, finding some patterns for table lookup to get the start address of the tables, or making a list of the tables vs OS, for each parameter or table.

e38 tuning will greatly benefit with that virtual ve tables that are next to impossible to tune with tunerpro.

I think v10 will need very small adjustments to get to the final version and we can evolve the v11 to some more exited features.

Is it possible to add to v11 some icons or tabs with icons for easy access, and some window arrangement will give much better overall look and feel.

kur4o wrote:It is just my opinion, but that mdi interface is much harder to work with. The tab design seems much better for that type of application. I hope you didn`t put too much effort in it, at least it was a good exercise for future developments.

I have been thinking for some auto table detection like maf, spark, ve for a generic ls1 bin, with some basic editor for the tables. It will be really cool and well suited within that mdi interface. I am still on the table detect algorithm, finding some patterns for table lookup to get the start address of the tables, or making a list of the tables vs OS, for each parameter or table.

e38 tuning will greatly benefit with that virtual ve tables that are next to impossible to tune with tunerpro.

I think v10 will need very small adjustments to get to the final version and we can evolve the v11 to some more exited features.

Is it possible to add to v11 some icons or tabs with icons for easy access, and some window arrangement will give much better overall look and feel.

I agree the new version is not intuitive at all, having a heck of a time figuring out how to do the simplest things.

Thank you for feedback!

I will revert back to tab-interface and v 0.10.1

0.10.3

Small fixes to Extract segment & autodetect.

I can TRY to add table edit features, if there is good reason for it. But there is no reason to duplicate Tunerpro functionality?

joukoy wrote:0.10.3

Small fixes to Extract segment & autodetect.

I can TRY to add table edit features, if there is good reason for it. But there is no reason to duplicate Tunerpro functionality?

I was kind of wondering about that, almost suggested tunerpro..
I've been using tuner pro for about a week now, there's a few shortcomings but it's workable.. It's better than anything I can write, so I'm happy with it..

I would love it if I could get it to do the checksums and CVN's but that's what I'm using your program for.. lol.. You can write an add on for tuner pro I understand, but that's over my head..

If anyone is working on XDF's for E38's let me know.. Working on 12653674 right now because that's what my truck runs..

ironduke wrote:

joukoy wrote:0.10.3

Small fixes to Extract segment & autodetect.

I can TRY to add table edit features, if there is good reason for it. But there is no reason to duplicate Tunerpro functionality?

I was kind of wondering about that, almost suggested tunerpro..
I've been using tuner pro for about a week now, there's a few shortcomings but it's workable.. It's better than anything I can write, so I'm happy with it..

I would love it if I could get it to do the checksums and CVN's but that's what I'm using your program for.. lol.. You can write an add on for tuner pro I understand, but that's over my head..

If anyone is working on XDF's for E38's let me know.. Working on 12653674 right now because that's what my truck runs..

I became curious and asked for a copy of Tunerpro plugin SDK.
I think I can create checksum plugin for e38 bins by modifying example plugin. But is there any need for it?

joukoy wrote:

ironduke wrote:

joukoy wrote:0.10.3

Small fixes to Extract segment & autodetect.

I can TRY to add table edit features, if there is good reason for it. But there is no reason to duplicate Tunerpro functionality?

I was kind of wondering about that, almost suggested tunerpro..
I've been using tuner pro for about a week now, there's a few shortcomings but it's workable.. It's better than anything I can write, so I'm happy with it..

I would love it if I could get it to do the checksums and CVN's but that's what I'm using your program for.. lol.. You can write an add on for tuner pro I understand, but that's over my head..

If anyone is working on XDF's for E38's let me know.. Working on 12653674 right now because that's what my truck runs..

I became curious and asked for a copy of Tunerpro plugin SDK.
I think I can create checksum plugin for e38 bins by modifying example plugin. But is there any need for it?

It's not a very big deal to use 1 program to read the flash and save it as a bin file, then another program to open that file and edit as needed, then open another program to correct checksums and CVN's, then use the first program again to write the flash/calibration back to the ECM..

It would be nicer to get the number of programs needed down I guess, lol.. If it wasn't hard to create a checksum plug in that could do the checksums and CVN's right in tuner pro then it would save a step and there'd be 1 less chance of screwing it up by opening/saving the file incorrectly or in a different location or a different name??

I have no idea how hard or where to even start using the plugin SDK, lol.. might take you 2 minutes? might take 2 days? All depends on how much effort you want to put in, unless someone else volunteers? or I someday learn how to do it myself, lol..

Tunerpro checksum plugin created for e38, does anyone want to test?

Currently it fixes checksum for all segments, only setting available is if you fix checksum1 (crc16) or checksum2 (wordsum).
And better to enable both.
Any other settings required?

Hi joukoy,
I don't have a vehicle here to test this with but if you post a "corrected" bin file I can open it in TunerCat and it will inform me if checksums are incorrect.