7 Apr
2004
7 Apr
'04
1:14 p.m.
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004 16:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
"Dwight K. Elvey" <dwight.elvey(a)amd.com> wrote:
I was referring to 'simplicity' in the matter of the resources of the host system
it uses, not the complexity of the actual disassembler. Good disassemblers are very very
complex and powerful tools.
A good disassembler could have a powerful interface using simple 'curses'
functionality or whatever the crude equivalent would be on MS-DOS.
From:
"Scott Stevens" <sastevens(a)earthlink.net>
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 16:08:17 -0400
Jim Donoghue <jim(a)smithy.com> wrote:
Hi
It is interesting that my definition of a disassembler is
quite a bit different than yours. I would call this a code
lister. A disassembler includes comments, selecting data types,
labeling branching and entry points and statistical cross referencing
( usually as comments in code ). This is often an interactive
process.
I guess writing one's own disassemblers tends to spoil a person.
Dwight
I'm trying to find a Z80 disassembler for
Linux. There are a bunch of
DOS ones out there, doesn't do me any good. A long time ago I had
downloaded one that was source and compiled it, but I can't remember
what it was. Anybody know of one?
Jim
Anything as simple as a Z80 disassembler is a stdin/stdout app anyway.