#Exe decompressor code#
Unless the compiled code comes with additional information, even function and variable names, packages, arrangement of code in the file, the file structure itself, would be essentially random and in effect often entirely unusable. At best, a decompiler can give you some approximate source code that would produce the same machine code. As bluepotato mentions, C++ is a compiled language that creates native machine code. But I'm no lawyer either.)Ĭlick to expand.So we are not talking about the Civ4 EXE here? It seems like you are under the impression that decompiling is the inverse operation of compiling, and will give you the source code as written by the original author. (Regarding legality: I always thought reverse-engineering itself is legal (at least in the EU) so long as you do not redistribute the code (or reuse parts of it), and redistribution of the Civ4 executable in binary form would be an intellectual property violation as well.
#Exe decompressor windows#
the Wine project which forbids individuals who have seen Windows source code from contributing to avoid legal trouble. Either way, even in that case, legally you're most likely better off avoiding any attempts to look at any implementation details see e.g. Note that this would take lots of effort and time even for a skilled programmer (or a group of skilled programmers for that matter). With enough effort however it would certainly be possible to write a compatible EXE without the original source. I believe there are other, more sophisticated ways to debug such problems as well. debugging mysterious crashes happening in the EXE) you are out of luck, remember to use version control so you can go back to the last version of your DLL that did work and figure out what displeased the EXE.
#Exe decompressor mods#
Larger mods usually provide their source code unless if they precisely don't want you to use it, so it's not like you'd be saving that much effort with decompilation anyways.įor studying the behavior of the executable (for e.g. If a DLL has a feature but doesn't provide its source code, it's far easier to code said feature yourself than to somehow try to suffer with decompilation/disassembly. Though they could be useful for recovering the sources of small (by small I mean just a few lines of code) programs, but in Civ4 terms it's out of question. Tools like Snowman or Hex-Rays Decompiler can generate C/C++-like code, butĪ) the result will be very far from the original source code, think more like c-like assembly code than the readable code in the released DLL sourcesī) due to the fact that a release DLL/EXE doesn't come with debug symbols, at best you would get function names like abcd123()Ĭ) these tools are mainly for analysis of existing programs, so the generated code will obviously not compile. An explicit discussion of how you would go about decompiling the EXE, or any advocacy for doing so, would be against the forum rules and will result in infractions and closing the thread.ĪFAIK this is close to impossible without significant effort. For the time being, an abstract discussion of the topic should be okay. Moderator Action: The forum rules prohibit discussion of intellectual property violations, so I have considered closing this thread. That would be like decompiling a cake to find out how much yeast went into it.
You will never be able to magically recover the source code the EXE has been compiled from.
In general, I don't think it is worth it. Some jurisdictions allow decompiling if required for interoperability, so it might be alright to look into the EXE to see how it interfaces with the DLL. You might be able to argue that decompiling the DLL is okay, because its source code has been provided, but that raises the question why you want to do this when you already have its source code. I haven't checked the EULA, but it's likely that doing so would be illegal, at least for the EXE.
0 kommentar(er)
