I agree with you, Dale, a "decompiler" would produce a different but
working version of the original one.

Francisco


Dale Botkin wrote:

>On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Mitch Miller wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 22 Feb 2002, Randy Poon wrote:
>>
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>I heard somebody said, we can get back the source code from a Java executable
>>>program easily by running some reverse engineering software. Is this true? Does
>>>the same apply to the C Language? If so, our C programs will be highly
>>>unprotected, which is something I don't want to see!
>>>
>>You have to first obtain the object code / binary, but once you have that,
>>and know the type of processor it was compiled for, it could be reverse
>>engineered into source code again.  The ones I've seen won't necessarily
>>have the same code labels as in your original source, since many
>>(most) compiled binaries don't contain them.  That would not, however,
>>keep the decompiler from assigning arbitrary labels to points in code it
>>sees as being "called" or "jmp"ed to.
>>
>
>And I think the chances of getting readable, useful C or Java from
>de-compiling code would be pretty slim.  There are a hundred different
>ways to write the same thing in C...  well, a hundred in Perl, maybe a
>dozen in C!  8-)  Disassembling is easy, decompiling would be hard.
>
>Dale
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
>(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics