The thing is that I'm developing a platform for software (source code) reverse engineering (static-analysis). And I've added two questions about that: Should I keep parenthesis information while source modeling? and https://reverseengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/159/how-to-model-lambda-functions-in-ast. One of them was downvoted and another one was downvoted-closed-reopened-upvoted. But I just want to ask if source code static analysis and reverse engineering questions are accepted here, because both of my question were treated quite bad.
1
-
Perhaps the lamda-function Question was too unclear. It did not explain where you are coming from.– Michael AndersonMar 23, 2013 at 18:14
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
I think that the topic itself is fine. However, I feel that your AST question is not really about reverse engineering itself but more about data structures, and possibly better belongs on SO. AST would probably look about the same in a program for source code RE or a traditional compiler.
Also, it's not necessarily the case here, but sometimes the process of building UML class diagrams from source code is called "reverse engineering" as well. I feel that that kind of RE is not really what we want to see here, unless it's a part of the some bigger picture that involves e.g. understanding or transforming a legacy project.
answered Mar 23, 2013 at 20:19
-
As I understand the question, then (in essence) its about whether or not to include parenthesis information in an AST. Whether the AST is being used in a context of RE or not, it is still just about the parenthesis information. Thus a basic theoretical computer science question, and it should belong there instead Mar 24, 2013 at 23:36
-
Take for example the answer. The fact that it mentions "Semantic Analysis" in a caption and has one paragraph (out of 11) mentioning that "Decompilers reconstruct ASTs from binary code [...]" doesn't make it a QA about reverse engineering in my point of view. Mar 25, 2013 at 14:23
Downvotes usually don't indicate that a question is off-topic. Each of your questions did attract at least three off-topic votes however.
I don't see how source code RE questions could be off-topic. They're about RE, how could they be off-topic?
The problem with your questions, as I see it, is that they aren't clear. While your end goal is reverse engineering, it's not clear what you're doing about this AST or how that's related to RE. I suspect that what you're asking about is indeed specific to RE, but it's not apparent in your questions.
What kinds of programs are you parsing? What are you doing with the parse trees? Editing your questions to provide this information will be beneficial all around:
- The questions will be clearer, so it's more likely that people who can answer it will understand it.
- With more context, it's more likely that you'll get relevant answers.
- It'll be apparent that the question is on-topic. (Or off, as the case may be.)
answered Mar 23, 2013 at 20:20
