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.

▲

dwattttt 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

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

▲

nvme0n1p1 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> 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 3 hours ago | parent [-]

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 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		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.

▲

dwattttt 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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.