recreating C source from binary

Is there any semantic difference between those two? They look like two different ways of writing the same operation. I doubt it can be pinned down that precisely. The code I quoted above is doubtless function prologue code, but I'd be surprised if there were really a well-defined mapping at the "this instruction comes from this variable, that instruction from that one" level of detail. That shouldn't help; as a function formal, char *argv[] is semantically identical to char **argv. (If the compiler doesn't have const, it's almost certainly not going to have new-style arglists, if you're talking about the new-style arglist rather than the change of spelling of the type). That's not to say it won't, though; compilers can be surprising in what causes them to produce different code. Optimization options might affect this; turning optimization off, or on at various levels, might produce the assembly code you're looking for. If none of that helps, all I can think of is the version difference that's already been suggested. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B