Open Janmm14 opened 2 years ago
The JavaObject could be without a "real" value (field value=null), as Object.<init> is calling initialize with null as value.
Object.<init>
null
Maybe only the JVMMethodProvider does not handle this case as expected - didn't check everywhere.
JVMMethodProvider
A way to represent virtual objects (instances of classes of the program being deobfuscated) is required.
It has to make sure
String.valueOf
I have no intention of creating a PR for this. This is not a problem for the already supported obfuscator versions.
The JavaObject could be without a "real" value (field value=null), as
Object.<init>is calling initialize withnullas value.Maybe only the
JVMMethodProviderdoes not handle this case as expected - didn't check everywhere.A way to represent virtual objects (instances of classes of the program being deobfuscated) is required.
It has to make sure
String.valueOf(and eventual similar methods implemented inJVMMethodProvider) behave as expected by the program to deobfuscateJVMMethodProvideris handled as expected (equals, hashCode)String.valueOfon a collection with a representation of a virtual object needs to be handled as expectedI have no intention of creating a PR for this. This is not a problem for the already supported obfuscator versions.