Anonymous Coward writes:
"Dan Luu, in his blog, suggests that editing binaries is something that we should consider from time to time. From that blog:
Editing binaries is a trick that comes in handy a few times a year. You don't often need to, but when you do, there's no alternative. When I mention patching binaries, I get one of two reactions: complete shock or no reaction at all. As far as I can tell, this is because most people have one of these two models of the world:
- There exists source code. Compilers do something to source code to make it runnable. If you change the source code, different things happen.
- There exists a processor. The processor takes some bits and decodes them to make things happen. If you change the bits, different things happen.
If you have the first view, breaking out a hex editor to modify a program is the action of a deranged lunatic. If you have the second view, editing binaries is the most natural thing in the world. Why wouldn't you just edit the binary?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Sir Garlon on Monday March 24 2014, @09:30PM
OK, now that I read TFA, what the author is talking about is changing the value of a constant, or something simple like that. In which case he actually has a point, kind of. Though I am not convinced that hacking a binary is quicker than updating the source code, if you then have to explain the binary hack to people like QA, your boss, or Legal. ;-)
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.