Revise what works and what doesn't

README.rst

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-|buildstatus|
+|buildstatus| |Supported Python Versions|
 
 uncompyle6
 ==========
@@ -96,26 +96,35 @@ For usage help:
 Known Bugs/Restrictions
 -----------------------
 
+The biggest known and possibly fixable (but hard) problem has to do
+with handling control flow. In some cases we can detect an erroneous
+decompilation and report that.
+
 About 90% of the decompilation verifies from Python 2.3.7 to Python
 3.4.2 on the standard library packages I have on my system.
 
-(Verification is the process of decompiling bytecode, compiling with a
+*Verification* is the process of decompiling bytecode, compiling with
-Python for that byecode version, and then comparing the byetcode
+a Python for that byecode version, and then comparing the bytecode
 produced by the decompiled/compiled program. Some allowance is made
-for inessential differences, but other semantically equivalent
+for inessential differences. But other semantically equivalent
-differences are not caught.)
+differences are not caught. For example ``if x: foo()`` is
+equivalent to ``x and foo()`` and decompilation may turn one into the
+other. *Weak Verification* on the other hand doesn't check bytecode
+for equivalence but does check to see if the resulting decompiled
+source is a valid Python program by running the Python
+interpreter. Because the Python language has changed so much, for best
+results you should use the same Python Version in checking as used in
+the bytecode.
 
-Later distributions average about 200 files. At this point, 2.7
+Later distributions average about 200 files. There is some work to do
-decompilation is definitely better than uncompyle2. A number of bugs
+on the lower end Python versions which is more difficult for us to
-have been fixed. We now handle more Python bytecodes than the old
+handle since we don't have a Python interpreter for versions 1.5, 1.6,
-decompyle program that handled Python bytecodes ranging from 1.5 to
+and 2.0.
-2.4.  There is some work do do on the lower end which is more
-difficult for us since we don't have a Python interpreter for versions
-1.5, 1.6 or 2.0.
 
-Python 3.5 largely works, but still has some bugs in it.
+Python 3.0 support is weak; Python 3.5 largely works, but still has
-Python 3.6 changes things drastically by using word codes rather than
+some bugs in it.  Python 3.6 changes things drastically by using word
-byte codes, and that needs to be addressed.
+codes rather than byte codes. That has been addressed, but then it also
+changes function call opcodes and its semantics.
 
 Currently not all Python magic numbers are supported. Specifically in
 some versions of Python, notably Python 3.6, the magic number has
@@ -125,6 +134,11 @@ which use their own magic and encrypt bytcode. With the exception of
 the Dropbox's old Python 2.5 interpreter this kind of thing is not
 handled.
 
+We also don't handle PJOrion_ obfuscated code. For that try: PJOrion
+Deobfuscator_ to unscramble the bytecode to get valid bytecode before
+trying this tool.
+
+
 There is lots to do, so please dig in and help.
 
 See Also
@@ -144,3 +158,7 @@ See Also
 .. _this: https://github.com/rocky/python-uncompyle6/wiki/Deparsing-technology-and-its-use-in-exact-location-reporting
 .. |buildstatus| image:: https://travis-ci.org/rocky/python-uncompyle6.svg
 		 :target: https://travis-ci.org/rocky/python-uncompyle6
+.. |Supported Python Versions| image:: https://img.shields.io/pypi/pyversions/uncompyle6.svg
+   :target: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/uncompyle6/
+.. _PJOrion: http://www.koreanrandom.com/forum/topic/15280-pjorion-%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5-%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8F%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8F%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F-%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%84
+.. _Deobfuscator: https://github.com/extremecoders-re/PjOrion-Deobfuscator