Of course LLMs see a lot more source-assembly pairs than even skilled reverse engineers, so this makes sense. Any area where you can get unlimited training data is one we expect to see top-tier performance from LLMs.
(also, hi Thomas!)
Burning tokens by asking the LLM to compile, disassemble, compare assembly, recompile, repeat seems very wasteful and inefficient to me.
Seems like a waste of money; wouldn't it be better to extract the AST deterministically, write it out and only then ask an LLM to change those auto-generated symbol names with meaningful names?
