• @over_clox
    link
    -52 years ago

    Never heard of a decompiler I see.

    • slst
      link
      fedilink
      222 years ago

      A decompiler doesnt give you access to the comments, variable names, which is an important part of every source code

      • BaroqueInMind
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        What’s cool is that you can interpret the var names yourself and rename them whatever you want.

        • slst
          link
          fedilink
          72 years ago

          But it is extremely time-consuming. Open source code makes it transparent and easy to read, that’s what it is about: transparency

    • newIdentity
      link
      fedilink
      142 years ago

      A decompiler won’t give you the source code. Just some code that might not even necessarily work when compiled back.

      • @over_clox
        link
        -22 years ago

        And? Decompilers aren’t for noobs. So what if it gives you variable and function names like A000, A001, etc?

        It can still lead a seasoned programmer where to go in the raw machine code to mod some things.

      • @over_clox
        link
        -72 years ago

        You’re actually chatting with a hacker that made No-CD hacks.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          A fancy way to say do nothing is not the same as translating back and forth. Example: Show me the intermediate translation.

          Also we live in a 64bit world now old man

          • @over_clox
            link
            02 years ago

            Also that instruction does not do nothing, it resets the CPU register to zero without having to access RAM. Far from a NOP instruction.

          • @over_clox
            link
            02 years ago

            You’re right.

            xor rax, rax

    • @SpaceNoodle
      link
      32 years ago

      Still not the actual source code, bucko.

      • @over_clox
        link
        -12 years ago

        No, it’s actually better when you can read the machine code.

        Most folks don’t care to recompile the whole thing when all they wanna do is bypass the activation and tracker shit.

        • @SpaceNoodle
          link
          22 years ago

          Having access to the source code actually makes reading machine code easier, so you’re also wrong on this entirely different thing you’re going on about.

          • @over_clox
            link
            -12 years ago

            You’ve clearly never used a disassembler such as HIEW have you? You get the entire breakdown of the assembly code.

            • @SpaceNoodle
              link
              12 years ago

              I disassemble binaries daily for work. It’s still not the same as source code.

              • @over_clox
                link
                02 years ago

                I didn’t say it was. I just said loosely what the OG meme said, if you know how to read assembly, you know how to read (and write) what some of the code does.

          • @over_clox
            link
            -12 years ago

            I never said disassembly or decompiling was easier in any way. I’ll agree with you on that, it’s way more difficult.

            Back to the point of the meme though, if you can read assembly, you can read it all.

            • @SpaceNoodle
              link
              2
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              You’ve never actually compared source code to its compiled output, have you.

              • @over_clox
                link
                02 years ago

                I’ve written drivers in 65 bytes of code. I don’t tend to use high level languages that hide what’s going on behind the scenes.