Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Graphs-related issues #1566

Closed
3 of 7 tasks
jvoisin opened this issue Oct 25, 2014 · 11 comments
Closed
3 of 7 tasks

Graphs-related issues #1566

jvoisin opened this issue Oct 25, 2014 · 11 comments

Comments

@jvoisin
Copy link
Contributor

jvoisin commented Oct 25, 2014

The visual graph mode is awesome, but it would be even better with:

  • Ability to have a cursor in this mode
    • Ability to follow calls
    • Ability to escape calls
  • Show only the current block, and the true and false one.
  • Colours :3
  • Add an overview mode, à la IDA, that only show branches and blocks, with no listing in them.
  • UTF-8 support
@newlog
Copy link
Contributor

newlog commented Nov 7, 2014

  • Maybe it should be added an improvement of the default node layout. Because to make some sense from the graph view you always have to redistribute nodes manually.

@trufae
Copy link
Collaborator

trufae commented Feb 19, 2016

there are dupped issues with other issues here. we should merge all the graph related tasks in a single one

@rlaemmert
Copy link
Contributor

How about adding n/N for jump to next and previous highlighted item?

@radare
Copy link
Collaborator

radare commented Mar 4, 2016

lgtm ! @ret2libc ?

On 04 Mar 2016, at 17:58, Rene Laemmert [email protected] wrote:

How about adding n/N for jump to next and previous highlighted item?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #1566 (comment).

@ret2libc
Copy link
Contributor

ret2libc commented Mar 7, 2016

@rlaemmert do you mean like in vim when you highlight something and then you press n/N? If so, I think that's something missing to the highlight engine in general, not specific to the graph, because the "goto searched term" feature is not implemented even in normal visual mode I think. Right, @radare ?

But I would definitely love to have such a feature :)

@rlaemmert
Copy link
Contributor

Yea thats exactly what i mean with that. This feature would be totally awesome.

@radare
Copy link
Collaborator

radare commented Mar 7, 2016

you mean highlighted stuff with /? there's n/N in visual mode to go next/prev flag/function/...

@rlaemmert
Copy link
Contributor

hm that doesnt seem to work as expected

I use /mov to highlight all mov instructions, after that if i press n or N
and then the screen seem to jump weird arround. Maybe a bug?

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:53 PM, radare [email protected] wrote:

you mean highlighted stuff with /? there's n/N in visual mode to go
next/prev flag/function/...


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1566 (comment).

@rlaemmert
Copy link
Contributor

@trufae
Copy link
Collaborator

trufae commented Mar 7, 2016

i didnt said that n/N does anything with the highlight at all

On 07 Mar 2016, at 17:00, Rene Laemmert [email protected] wrote:

hm that doesnt seem to work as expected

I use /mov to highlight all mov instructions, after that if i press n or N
and then the screen seem to jump weird arround. Maybe a bug?

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:53 PM, radare [email protected] wrote:

you mean highlighted stuff with /? there's n/N in visual mode to go
next/prev flag/function/...


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1566 (comment).


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub #1566 (comment).

@rlaemmert
Copy link
Contributor

oh my fault, didnt read carefully enough.
you mean n/N is already used for something different in visual mode

@Maijin Maijin mentioned this issue Mar 9, 2017
21 tasks
@Maijin Maijin closed this as completed Mar 10, 2017
yossizap pushed a commit to yossizap/radare2 that referenced this issue Dec 30, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants