When the starting point isn't the starting point..
 nummish <nummish 0x90 org> |
Monday, August 1 2005 01:20.04 CDT |
After taking the time to rewrite every mnemonic from scratch, again, I decided to attack the nagging flaw that kora pointed out over coffee.
With larger applications it seemed like they were disassembling properly, so to actually test properly we threw a very simple 5 line program with no calls. Sadly, out of the ten functions disassembled, none of them were the actual test program.
Other than the entry point, there are at least 10 direct or relative called functions that can be disassembled for most of the code I've compiled with gcc. One of the ones that wasn't showing up was main(). The main() function is called in start usually by a call to a jump to the base of the stack, which isn't currently handled.
I finally got the the symbol tables (which include the address of main()) adding functions after the rest of them are found. Next up, repairing the damage I did to the Indirect Operands.
Comments
| Posted: Wednesday, December 31 1969 18:00.00 CST | |