micahsnyder
commented
2 years ago Hi @JoeyHasALittleLamb
Just from reading the code and reading your suggested change, I think you may be right. But I will have to test it. Are you comfortable with submitting a pull request with the suggested change so you can get credit for the commit?
Also, can you please provide a link to the file on VT that you're testing with so we can verify the fix?
Regards, Micah
Describe the bug
No formula function name is extracted after xlm extracting. (image 1red arrow below) the function name is parsing to “” , the address is 0xff96 which is the root case. 0x0096 should be the right address after hex dump the original file.
By reviewing code(image2), i think xlm_extract.c:line 4004 should be ———> uint16_t func_id = (uint8_t)(data[data_pos + 2]) | (uint8_t)((data[data_pos + 3] << 8)); Re-scan again, the formula function name is extracted correctly..(image 3)
How to reproduce the problem
Xlm sample file downloaded from VT, scan it.
Attachments