On Jan 27, 10:23 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ndisasm error.txt > >> >00000000 54 push sp > >> >00000001 686973 push word 0x7369 > >> >00000004 206973 and [bx+di+0x73],ch > >> >00000007 206E6F and [bp+0x6f],ch > >> >0000000A 7420 jz 0x2c > >> >0000000C 61 popa > >> >0000000D 7373 jnc 0x82 > >> >0000000F 656D gs insw > >> >00000011 626C65 bound bp,[si+0x65] > >> >00000014 722E jc 0x44 > >> >00000016 2E db 0x2E > >> >00000017 2E db 0x2E > >> >00000018 0A db 0x0A > > >> >:/ > > >> not sure what you're saying. Sure looks like assembler to me. Take the > >> '54 push sp'. The 54 is an assembler opcode for push and the sp is > >> the stack pointer, on which it is operating. > > >go troll somewhere else (you obviously don't know anything about > >assembler and don't want to learn anything about Python). > > >-- bjorn > > before you start mouthing off, maybe you should learn assembler. If > you're really serious, go to the Intel site and get it from the horses > mouth. The Intel manual on assembler lists the mneumonics as well as > the opcodes for each instruction. It's not called the Intel Machine > Code and Assembler Language Manual. It's the bible on assembly > language, written by Intel. > > If you're not so serious, here's a URL explaining it, along with an > excerpt from the article: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86_assembly_language > > Each x86 assembly instruction is represented by a mnemonic, which in > turn directly translates to a series of bytes which represent that > instruction, called an opcode. For example, the NOP instruction > translates to 0x90 and the HLT instruction translates to 0xF4. Some > opcodes have no mnemonics named after them and are undocumented. > However processors in the x86-family may interpret undocumented > opcodes differently and hence might render a program useless. In some > cases, invalid opcodes also generate processor exceptions. > > As far as this line from your code above: > > 00000001 686973 push word 0x7369 > > 68 of 686973 is the opcode for PUSH. Go on, look it up. The 6973 is > obviously the word address, 0x7369. Or, do you think that's > coincidence? > > Don't fucking tell me about assembler, you asshole. I can read > disassembled code in my sleep.
What was originally posted was: """ [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ cat error.txt This is not assembler... [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ndisasm error.txt 00000000 54 push sp 00000001 686973 push word 0x7369 00000004 206973 and [bx+di+0x73],ch [snip] """ Read it again -- he's "disassembled" the text "This is not assembler..." 54 -> "T" 686973 -> "his" 206973 -> " is" but you say "68 of 686973 is the opcode for PUSH. Go on, look it up. The 6973 is obviously the word address, 0x7369. Or, do you think that's coincidence?" You are a genius of a kind encountered only very rarely. Care to share with us your decryption of the Voynich manuscript? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
