[hackyhacky]

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.

[nvme0n1p1]

> 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.

[hackyhacky]

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.

[dwattttt]

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.

[hackyhacky]

You are missing the point.

Windows is not a platform for serious people.

[nvme0n1p1]

Maybe so, but that's not what you claimed. You claimed that WinDbg "does not assemble or disassemble", when of course it does. Try to be more accurate with your claims if you want serious people to take you seriously.

[hackyhacky]

What I said, in part, is:

> Moreover, I don't consider Windows to be part of the modern era,

Why are you lying about what I said when everyone can see it?

[dwattttt]

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

[dwattttt]

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.