Re: In search of the perfect Disassembler

randyhyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx écrivait news:1117556922.514308.3240
@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Too bad the claims you made were on the MASMForum. Perhaps you've
> forgotten because you made such claims in the "heat of battle?" In any
> case, let's say you are correct and you've never made such a claim. The
> fact that you've expended considerable effort fighting claims that the
> halting theorem was just "academic B.S." certainly indicates that you
> felt you were going to provide a perfect disassembly. IIRC, it was
> about six months (into the latter part of 2003, according to posts I'm
> reading now) that you back-tracked on the capabilities of your
> disassembler.

In other words, you are a liar and have no link to provide.

What i may have said is that the ass-holes who write books,
and smoking theories, like your famous "halting theorem" :)
are not the ones who do the job, and that i am doing the job.

The guys who do the job do not need of the advices and opinions
of ass-holes who never did anything.


> So we're faced with one of two possibilities: you were lying then or
> you are lying now.

???!!!... Feel free to post any Link...


> Either you recognized that 100% automatic
> disassembly was impossible early on and you made all those early posts
> against the claims of the halting theorem knowing that the other person
> was correct (meaning you were lying back then), or you finally
> discovered that perfect disassembly was not possible and you changed
> your opinion on the subject (meaning you're lying now). Take your pick.

Have have no choice to do, as i am not yet senile enough
for believing that a "100% automatic disassembly" could
succeed 100% on 100% of the cases. Only an definitive idiot,
like you, could imagine that i could believe this.


>> Feel free to show any Link to a Post of mine, where i
>> would have written that RosAsm Disassembler was going
>> to disassemble and Reassemble all Applications in two
>> Clicks.
>
> Okay, point to Rene. I do see figures like 95% being discussed though.
> No chance of reaching that, either.

In other words, ... you are a liar.


>> > All the while maintaining that
>> > "interactive disassembly" was a waste of time.
>>
>> True. More than this: This is unhonest illusion selling:
>>
>> "The Disassembler fails to do the job. Solution: Let us
>> let the user do the job, instead". Absurd.
>
> Be careful what you say. The statement immediately above certainly
> gives the impression that if the user cannot do it, the program can.
> Therefore, 100% perfect disassembly must be possible, eh?

Poor clown.


>> With Small Apps, a Disassembler must be able to produce
>> a 100% valid Disassembly Source from most Files.
>
> Impossible. Size is not the relevant parameter. Coding style is. When
> you get your disassembler finished, I can promise you that I can break
> it in a few minutes with a few lines of code.

The day i will wish to discuss about Disassembling
process, i will probably choose to discuss with a
guy having some competency. Not with an idiot who,
as proven by your downward bullshits, does not even
undestand the relationship between the Disassembly
size and the Disassembly quality.


Betov.

< http://rosasm.org >

.

Quantcast