Please help me to test it.
You can download linux executable here
www.andreig.com/jasm
There is also a helpfull tool (linux executable)
to disassemble java classfiles to bytecode
www.andreig.com/jfr
Thanks

roedy green

that seems an odd thing to do. Why did you choose C rather than
assembler? Just familiarity? for bootstrapping to a new platform?
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.

oliver wong

I'm guessing the OP's program parses JASMIN files and produces class
files out of it, thus acting basically as a very simple compiler. It's
probably a pain to write parsers in pure assembler, whereas there are tools
(e.g. Yacc, Bison, etc.) to assist writing parsers in C.

To the OP, no offense, but I don't trust you well enough to run your
binary executables. Why don't you provide the source code for your program
instead?

- Oliver

roedy green

oops. I meant to ask Why did you choose C rather than Java?
Was it familiarity with the C parsers and not wanting to relearn the
Java ones?
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.

Well,
It's close source.
How can I make it trustable?
Use strace and see if it does anything wrong.
For example jad is distributed as executable, people use it.

chris uppal

Some reasons for trusting programs which don't come with source:

1) If enough /other/ people are using an unknown executable, then I will be
more likely to trust it.

2) If the program comes from a sufficiently reputable source, then I will be
more likely to trust it.

3) Combining the first two: if the program is likely to have come under
attention from the sort of people who routinely read IA32 machine code (OK,
perhaps they disassemble it first ;-) then I will be more likely to trust it.

4) If the program does something desirable and unique, then I'll be more likely
to trust it.

5) If I simply have no choice (e.g. elements of the OS if I'm on Windows), then
I'll be more likely to trust it.

JAD (which I do use, btw) has at least (1) and (4). (Decompiling is a good
deal harder than disassembling.) Your program, at least as far as I know,
does not have any of (1)...(5). If it becomes popular then it will get (1),
but I doubt if that will happen unless there is something special (4) about it.
Perhaps it is blazingly fast (although it's difficult to imagine speed making
much difference for any real application), or perhaps it has an elegant and
flexible macro system. Or perhaps it has some other unique advantage.
Whatever, if you want people to use it, then you'll have to tell them what
advantages it has over other assembler/disassembler packages.

(BTW, whatever the advantages you can cite, it's unlikely that I'll use it
myself -- nothing personal, and not a criticism of your program, it's just that
I prefer generate bytecodes directly (from code), rather than via an
assembler.)

-- chris

roedy green

Someone writing a Trojan is more likely to do something cutesy or
maudlin that will suck in a large number of naive users.
--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.

oliver wong

You Bonsai Buddy (spl?), that purple monkey thing? My brother downloaded
it, and I told him it's spyware, and he told me he likes Bonsai Buddy, so it
was "worth it". A few months later, he called Bonsai Buddy a traitor and
backstabber and asked me to remove him.

- Oliver