Christian Blichmann

Similar to #123. @williballenthin, there is an internal draft change for this that I'll add you to.

I could've sworn I already answered on this issue. I'll be happy to accept a PR, if `BINEXPORT_BINARYNINJA_LATEST` defaults to `OFF`. > [...] since the repo is being downloaded/checked out...

> type import/export ultimately based on clang For various reasons I cannot run commercial Binary Ninja as part of our build infra.

That's true. So basically, we then should have a new CMake option that enables to regenerate the "bindings"/header files. It should default to `ON`, if CMake found an actual Binary...

Is this still a problem? I upgraded Boost to 1.83 in 840ddeec017a4ca85985a9b7919079d2f79f5d38

Thank you for this thorough analysis (and happy new year!). The suggested short term solution SGTM, and we should implement this in the Ghidra exporter. TBH, when I started implementing...

I think there might be a bit of confusion here about what is meant by the de-duplication. True, an instruction can be part of multiple basic blocks and basic blocks...

> [...] > Is it ok for BinExport2 exporters to de-duplicate the storage for Expressions and Operands? I don't _think_ there are address-like details that may leak into this abstraction....

> Specifically, "the previous instruction doesn't have code flow into the current one" would not record e.g. the address of the first instruction of a basic block that follows a...

For convenience, can you attach two .BinExport files to this bug? To me, this looks like an issue with the Ghidra extension and/or Ghidra's disassembly. BinDiff assumes that BinExport files...