Discussions on The C/C++ Reversing Reference Thread

[Skywing]

In C++, and many other languages, the compiler will generate the following code to access an item in an array:

Code Select Expand


mov eax, [arraybase+index*arraytypesize]


arraybase is the pointer to the base of the array, index is the item in the array you are trying to retreive, and arraytypesize is the size of the type the array is declared as.

Note that it would probably be a lea there, not a mov.  It's also not uncommon to see several leas if you are dealing with an array of structures.

[Maddox]

In C++, and many other languages, the compiler will generate the following code to access an item in an array:

Code Select Expand


mov eax, [arraybase+index*arraytypesize]


arraybase is the pointer to the base of the array, index is the item in the array you are trying to retreive, and arraytypesize is the size of the type the array is declared as.

Note that it would probably be a lea there, not a mov.  It's also not uncommon to see several leas if you are dealing with an array of structures.

Why would it be lea? It would depend on what the code is doing. It's not uncommon to see mov ecx, [array+index*size].

[Adron]

For some arithmatic:

This C code:

Code Select Expand

int edx = 3;
edx = edx * 2 + 5;

will probably look like this:

Code Select Expand

mov edx, 3
lea edx, [5 + edx*2]


lea's can be used for arithmatic.

Note that that particular C-code probably would be optimized to assign a constant to edx

[iago]

For some arithmatic:

This C code:

Code Select Expand

int edx = 3;
edx = edx * 2 + 5;

will probably look like this:

Code Select Expand

mov edx, 3
lea edx, [5 + edx*2]


lea's can be used for arithmatic.

Note that that particular C-code probably would be optimized to assign a constant to edx

Yes, but that would defeat the example