Why can't you decompile a program once it's been compiled?

Why can't you decompile a program once it's been compiled?

Other urls found in this thread:

wiki.installgentoo.com/
startpage.com/
duckduckgo.com
stackexchange.com/
logicalincrements.com/
boards.Sup
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

But you can?

It's called reverse engineering?

By that logic all software products are "free" since you can decompile them and make modifications?

The Sup Forums Wiki:
wiki.installgentoo.com/

Sup Forums is for the discussion of technology and related topics.
Sup Forums is NOT your personal tech support team or personal consumer review site.

For tech support/issues with computers, use /wsr/ - Worksafe Requests or one of the following:
startpage.com/ or duckduckgo.com (i.e., fucking google it)
stackexchange.com/
logicalincrements.com/

You can also search the catalog for a specific term by using:
boards.Sup Forums.org/g/searchword or by clicking on [Search]

He hasn’t asked for technical support with any piece of technology, neither for customer reviews.
You are shitting up the board. Fuck off.

Have you ever seen the output of a decompiled application? It's never as good as you would think. It's pretty messed up sometimes. It really depends on language and possible obfuscation used.
I can't believe you've actually haven't even tried it. You should first find out which language its written in and then search a decompiler for that lang.

no, licenses can protect binaries as well

So why didnt anyone decompile the linux yet to remove the gnu??

Just about any software can be decompiled, unless it has been obfuscated, and even then it is still possible to decompile.

Have you ever seen minified javascript? You essentially get that with line breaks for most decompiled applications.

you can. it's just might be very time-consuming

Why can't you turn a cake back into eggs and flour?

What a fag

good post desu why has it no replies?
checked btw

>chemical reactions are the same as compilation

Why can't you decrypt a string withoutusing a key once it's been encrypted? Well, technically you can...

Literally true.

But Linux is open source already, seriously, why doesn't anyone remove that gnushit?

linux doesn't come with any gnushit

Not really. When you bake a cake, you can't ever get back what you put in. There is no reversal of those chemical reactions. If decompilation were like unbaking a cake, it would be more akin to getting the ingredients back, but having no idea what they were.

Even if you know the language it was written in many have more than one way of producing the same output because of the way the compiler compiles. It would essentially be a generator more than a conversion.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.
Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

That's it.

Decompiled """code""" would take so much time to put in a proper way (like the original code) that it's better to look elsewhere.

linter much?

I decompile java all the time

Why can't you add the comments back into a program once the compiler removed them?

you can
also the function names
and variable names
and all the formatting fluff that made the original code easy to read
this is the hard part, you get zero help as to what the code does, as it's missing all the human elements present in the original code, which a compiler strips out, since a computer doesn't give a shit what things are /called/

There are decompilers but considering the code they spit out, you might as well just look at the assembly

they've had source decompilers for a very long time now

Fucking newfags
> /sqt/

Write some javascript, then try to make sense of minified javascript.

...