ngc92 How do I cheat?
Reputation: 0
Joined: 19 Oct 2010 Posts: 2
|
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2011 3:43 pm Post subject: suggestions |
|
|
Hello,
while working with CE 6.1 and using the comments feature (btw, it's a great addition) i got some ideas for improvements of CE:
Extending the comments feature: till now, it is only possible to make annotations to instructions. this could be extended to:
1) annotations for registers:
example: there is the following code:
a) mov eax, 100
... some instructions which don't modify eax
b) mov [...], eax
my idea is that you can comment at a) what the value of eax is, e.g. i tell CE that eax = HEALTH. now, after a lot of instructions, i encounter an instruction which uses eax. Now, i maybe have to scroll upwards until i find my commend stating that eax contains help. An automatic system which keeps track of such information would be great. I know that this could become very complicated if jumps and calls are involved, but i think these problems could be solved (the dissect code function already finds all jumps, so this system could look whether there is an instrutions which jumps between a and b that makes it unclear whether eax at b) contains help).
it seems a pretty big task, but it would certainly make it a lot easier to break down larger chunks of assembly code.
2) annotations for values in stack:
pretty much the same as 1) but for stack values. Keeping track of stack values manually is really annoying esp. if you have instructions that change the stack pointer inbetween.
3) annotations for functions.
this suggestions is a little bit smaller. I would like to be able to add some information to an address which would be read if this address is accessed by a call. The se information could be: name of function, description, parameter, return value.
example:
function: push eax
mov eax, [esp+8]
add eax, [esp+c]
mov [esp+8], eax
pop eax
ret
the, the annotations would be:
name: add
descriptin: adds to numbers
params: [esp+4]: number 1
[esp+8]: number 2
return: [esp+4]: sum
and then somewhere else:
call function
would be written as
call add
and moving the mose over the instruction would show the additional information.
seems like a lot, but think of it as a sign of how much i liked your commet feature^^
|
|