Re: Need reviews of HLA Adventure



Betov wrote:
> >
> >> Hard days ahead for IDA Pro... :))
> >
> > At least you know how to make jokes.
>
> Yes, but, here, there is no joke. RosAsm Disassembler
> is actualy already, and evidently, better than IDA on
> many points, particulary on the so important point of
> the Automatic Recognitions of what is Code and of what
> is Data.

:-)
This, from the guy who claims he doesn't use IDAPro. :-)

I do like the "evidently" phrase. Loosely translated, this means that
you've found at least one example where your disassembler does a better
job than IDAPro (doing automatic conversion, which isn't what IDAPro is
about anyway, hence the "interactive" part of the name).

But go on deluding yourself.


>
> It also beats IDA hands down on the point that it can,
> in a significative number of cases, _re-compile_ the
> disassembled Application, what no other Disassembler
> can do: IDA does not even _TRY_ to disassemble the
> Resources, by the way... and would anyone try to re-
> compile a Disassembly Listing from IDA, (or from any
> other Disassembler), on any App not having Resources
> inside, to reduce the difficulties, it would much
> probably not work, in most cases, even on the simpler
> Demos.

Actually, you are quite correct. IDAPro isn't intended for source code
recovery (an almost useless facility). It is intended for code
analysis. For that reason, its output is not *syntactically* compatible
with any existing assembler. OTOH, it takes about 30 min with a typical
search and replace editor function to make a large file "compilable."

So "RosAsm's disassembler has the advantage here, eh?" Well, when you
consider the fact that disassembly is not going to be perfect (even
with a *lot* of help from a user in interactive mode), and it's
unlikely that you'll create a source file of any signficant size that
you can reassemble (say, at a different load address in memory) and get
a working program, the whole concept of "source code recovery" via
disassembly is a pipe dream. Sure, it *can* be done in theory. But the
need for that is almost non-existant. If people needed this facility,
you better believe that DataRescue would provide that facility in
IDAPro. But people don't use disassemblers for that purpose. The vast
majority of people using disassemblers use them for reverse engineering
(in which case the *last* thing you want to do is to use the code that
the disassembler produces, that's a clear copyright violation) or
researching subversive programs (i.e., viruses).

You seem to be suffering from this delusional fantasy that the moment
your disassembler is ready, people will start flocking to RosAsm
because now they can disassemble all the library code that other
assembler users are linking into their programs today. I've got some
sad news for you-- that just isn't going to happen. First of all,
everyone else has already got library capabilities, *without* having to
run code through a disassembler, determine the lines that belong in a
useful library module, and cut and paste that into their monolithic app
in RosAsm. Second, though RosAsm syntax isn't especially readable now,
it is *far* easier to read than disassembled code. It takes about as
much effort to clean up disassembled code as it does to write that code
cleanly in the first place. Finally, *figuring out* what a piece of
disassembled code does is no "walk in the park." It's difficult and
time consuming. By the time someone figures out what a fair-sized chunk
of disassembled code does, they could have written ten times as many
comparable library routines.

But continue to waste time on your disassembler. It keeps you from
making *real* progress on your system. Viva la assembly rebirth!
Cheers,
Randy Hyde

.

Relevant Pages

  • De- Evolution
    ... > RosAsm Disassembler-Reassembler is actually (developement ... disassembler *doesn't* disassemble anything properly. ... RosASM as long as you take the attitude "I'll get around ... recursive macro invocations. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: .EXE -> .ASM -> .EXE
    ... You are mistaken in asuming that all RosAsm users are only the ones ... But you guys have claimed how great your disassembler ... The goal is translation of libraries to pure assembly code, ... insetad simply you do as in other assemblers that is.. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Renes Revisionist History, Again
    ... When I said the apps "sucked hard", ... I was astonished that even Rene would use a few simple "hello world" ... examples as proof that RosAsm is "the fastest, ... >> have you seen how poorly it works compared to a real disassembler? ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: A modern view of the halting problem
    ... RosAsm can disassemble properly. ... the other ones, where the Disassembler fails. ... RosAsm could chocking when adding a NOP to a disasembly. ... you use separate code to process the RosAsm equates file. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Born again
    ... How do you think that RosAsm came up to 4 ... way to create failures in the world of software engineering. ... when i change something in the Disassembler Recognition (that ... project with a fair sized team of programmers working on it. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)