I would like to make sure you understand that 0x0(%rbp) is the amount of a register’s BPL that the register will set based on the total amount of bytes that it can store. It is a register’s way of saying “how much of this register can I store, without any errors.” This is the type of register that is used to store pointers, etc.
0x0rbp is a register that stores the contents of all the bytes in the immediate field that are less than or equal to the BPL. This is the type of register that is used to store pointers, etc.
It’s also a register that is used when you want to access a memory location that is not currently in use. This is usually done for storing a pointer to a memory location (like a struct or an array) because this is a common use of this register.
The number that the register is used for is equal to the value of the first argument to the unary procedure. The zero value is the end of the procedure. The other values are the values that the procedure is expecting to be on to.0x0rbp is the next value to be used. There are other values in the register that are not in use, and they might have been in use before 0x0rbp, but they should be in use now.
The only way that 0x0rbp would be used is if the value in the register was being used to access memory that is now out of bounds. This is not an uncommon use, though it is most likely not what was in question. The zero value can be used to access memory that is out of bounds. However, this means that the value being used is now in use. This is why 0x0rbp is used as the first value in an array.
I agree. The 0x0(%rbp) value is being used to access memory that is now out of bounds. This is the only way that 0x0rbp could be used to access memory that is out of bounds. The register would have to be a part of an array that you can move to an index that is outside the bounds.
I think the author is making a point a little subtle as well. After all, the author’s goal in making the 0x0(%rbp) mean is to add a 0x0 to the value of the register and use it for an array index. This is not the only way to do it, but it’s the closest one that makes sense.
The code in the article is actually quite simple. In the code snippet, the author does this with a rather complex way of doing it, but the idea is not that hard to understand. All you need to do is add an extra bit of logic to the end of the code and make sure that the index is outside the bounds.
I’d say that’s a pretty good way to add a 0x0 to a variable. It is not the only way, but it’s the nearest one that makes sense in this case. The other ways are not very intuitive, and could also confuse you if you weren’t careful.
If you need more insight into the problem, you can get more detailed info with some information in the comments. The main reason for this is that it is a lot of the time, so that you can put your code in a little more context. I’ve said it before, but I’ll do my best to explain it here.
