Colton Skees

> Won't this break the dynamic symbolic execution approach where we make the constraints based on the path that was actually executed? @SweetVishnya Can you give a case example? The...

@SweetVishnya Take `stosb` as an [example](https://github.com/JonathanSalwan/Triton/blob/master/src/libtriton/arch/x86/x86Semantics.cpp#L15911). With the change I suggested, this code: ``` /* Create symbolic expression */ auto expr1 = this->symbolicEngine->createSymbolicExpression(inst, node1, dst, "STOSD operation"); auto expr2 =...

> Maybe, we should split this PR by instruction groups. Agreed, #1/#3/#4 should be split into separate. grouped PRs/ > But you never know what break symbolic reasoning in real...

> In a general point of view, removing all evaluate() from the instruction semantics could be a step forward to solve https://github.com/JonathanSalwan/Triton/issues/473. I have a .NET port of Triton(mostly the...

>I also did some experiments with symbolic pointers long time ago [here](https://github.com/JonathanSalwan/Triton/pull/723/files). Neat > also writing C# bindings for Triton would be easier than copy-pasting the code. If I linked...