Hey!
I know about the post that says you do not resolve ROR/ROL because there is no specific ‘c representation’. Why is it not done with an option by resolving the functions as defined in defs.h in the decompiler?
Do I really need to write my own microcode plugin to calculate and resolve those simple ror/rol instructions even for such a simple constant case?
I may have misunderstood the question, but this is exactly what is happening now. We print helpers because there are no standard rol/ror C operators. We also don’t have microcode instructions for them.
Can you share your sample for investigation?
The issue is, that you print the helpers instead if resolving those even though it is pretty trivial. The goal is to have those calculated in the c code view. It is rather annoying to make a plugin for that as microcode plugin. While there is no instruction for them there I could take the call it does and replace that with the calculated result I believe. Or you could simply add such a thing 
what you want
is called deobfuscation
and I am categorically against IDA doing it herself
this functionality should be a separate plugin
or you yourself
You do not seem to understand what the issue is at all. That is just a case where a constant got replaced by a calculation yes, but there are enough other cases where it is very useful to have a ror/rol resolved.
This is not deobfuscation related at all.
I understand
You don’t have to write it because I already did it rotate_const.py · GitHub.
That wasn’t the intention of this post to let other do that instead of hex rays or myself, but great stuff! And actually works and is simple enough <3
I made that code months ago…
