The domain name reminds me of the venerable DOS "debug.com" command, which managed to combine an interactive and scriptable debugger, assembler, and disassembler into a program weighing a few kilobytes. I spent many long hours in my youth using it to reverse engineering copy protection on games. I really wish we had a similar tool for the modern era.

    The DEBUG utility was originally named DEBUG.COM in early versions
    of MS-DOS, but it was renamed to DEBUG.EXE starting with MS-DOS 3.2
Shoutout to the 12 of us who remember debug> g=c800:5

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who immediately thought of this.

And yes, some of us are either old enough that we remember DEBUG.COM, or we got started way too young.

[deleted]

Oh wow. I remember doing this as well... with little to no success.

The debug.com binary only showed one measly ASM instruction at a time as I recall. Shudder.

Just type u and strike Enter

WinDbg?

WinDbg is a cool, but debug.com predates it by quite a bit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debug_(command)

Thus making it "a similar tool for the modern era" as you were asking for, IMO.

My favorite thing about WinDbg is that many people pronounce it "Windbag".

WinDbg is just a debugger: it does not assemble or disassemble. It can't patch running programs in memory. Moreover, I don't consider Windows to be part of the modern era, as I haven't used a Windows machine for 20 years.

So, no, WinDbg has nothing to do with debug.com.

I'm not sure what you think a (native) debugger that can't disassemble would look like; I assure you it disassembles the instructions you debug.

Its assembler is sadly stuck in the pre-x86_64 era (and refuses to do arm at all), however it disassembles all of those fine.

Signed: someone who does pronounce it wind bag

> I don't consider Windows to be part of the modern era, as I haven't used a Windows machine for 20 years.

I don't consider France to be part of the modern world, since I haven't visited Europe lately.

A more apt analogy: I don't consider North Sentinel Island to be part of the modern world, since there is no relevant innovation going on there, it has no influence on the rest of the world, and there is nothing to be learned there.

You miss debug.com, wish there was an equivalent for the modern era, find out that windbg does almost all these things today, and say there's nothing of value there.

I say this as something who does all the things you described debug.com as doing, in this modern era.

Actually, I didn't even get to this part of your message, windbg absolutely can patch currently running programs. It does all the things you think it can't do.

Okay, but is it not what you wished for, "a similar tool for the modern era"?

edit: I see I simul-posted with u/modeless, but I can't remove it now that there's a (duplicate) reply. Maybe mods can remove or at least collapse mine (their ID is one lower so they were first)

WinDbg is just a debugger: it does not assemble or disassemble. It can't patch running programs in memory. Moreover, I don't consider Windows to be part of the modern era, as I haven't used a Windows machine for 20 years.

So, no, WinDbg has nothing to do with debug.com.

Fun! So how was OP supposed to know your very personal and weird definition of what is part of the modern era?

If OP wanted to know whether WinDbg and debug.com can be considered feature-similar, they could have read my first comment [1], where I specifically said that debug.com is a "debugger, *assembler*, and *disassembler*". Of those three features, WinDbg provides one.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48362927