So i been using konghack for 2 days and noticed when a hack its already shown as hacked and you reapply the hacks to(for example) put a new hack, the new hack its hacked(if it worked) but the already hacked hacks will show as failed and get an downvote.

My ''suggestion''(i didn't know what was the proper subject) is to maybe fix that otherwise the ''innocent'' working hacks will get downvoted for no reason and get people confused looking how the hack worked and not worked at the same day.

Btw, this is my first post and spanish its my native language in case you notice some errors in my typing

For example i mostly use KHUT on SAS: Zombie Assault 4, and some times i forgot to apply a cheat and im still in the main screen, so i select the cheat i forgot to apply and i proceed to apply the cheat, the first time i did that i didn't deselect the hacked status cheats and they ended up showing as failed and the new one showing as hacked.

I think this happens when KHUT tries to reapply a hack but as it is already hacked KHUT can't really change the value as it is already changed and its programing thinks it failed, but you already thinked of that right?

 

I only did it the first time because i didn't know that happens, i will always deselect hacks in case i need to reapply

what if you saved a temporary value for each hack? lets say the address of where the aob was found.

so you apply the hacks to a game with pid 5111 right, and it saves the addresses for each hack in a vector. then next time you apply the hacks it would check if the pid matches to 5111, and if they do match it just compares the aob found at that address to the original and replacement aobs to see which one it is, versus re-scanning the memory. if the pid has changed, then it overwrites the old addresses with the new ones. this way it will be able to determine if the hack has already been applied, and wont get false positives like you might if you just scan for the replacement aob.

honestly it sounds like itd be a total pain in the ass to add into your already existing code, but thats the best idea i can come up with that might actually work.