'''binary scan''' ''string formatString ?varName varName ...?'' The '''binary scan''' command parses fields from a binary string, returning the number of conversions performed. ''String'' gives the input to be parsed and ''formatString'' indicates how to parse it. Each ''varName'' gives the name of a variable; when a field is scanned from ''string'' the result is assigned to the corresponding variable. As with '''[binary format]''', the ''formatString'' consists of a sequence of zero or more field specifiers separated by zero or more spaces. Each field specifier is a single type character followed by an optional numeric ''count''. Most field specifiers consume one argument to obtain the variable into which the scanned values should be placed. The type character specifies how the binary data is to be interpreted. The ''count'' typically indicates how many items of the specified type are taken from the data. If present, the count is a non-negative decimal integer or '''*''', which normally indicates that all of the remaining items in the data are to be used. If there are not enough bytes left after the current cursor position to satisfy the current field specifier, then the corresponding variable is left untouched and '''binary scan''' returns immediately with the number of variables that were set. If there are not enough arguments for all of the fields in the format string that consume arguments, then an error is generated. A similar example as with '''[binary format]''' should explain the relation between field specifiers and arguments in case of the binary scan subcommand: binary scan $bytes s3s first second This command (provided the binary string in the variable bytes is long enough) assigns a list of three integers to the variable ''first'' and assigns a single value to the variable ''second''. If ''bytes'' contains fewer than 8 bytes (i.e. four 2-byte integers), no assignment to ''second'' will be made, and if ''bytes'' contains fewer than 6 bytes (i.e. three 2-byte integers), no assignment to ''first'' will be made. Hence: puts [binary scan abcdefg s3s first second] puts $first puts $second will print (assuming neither variable is set previously): 1 25185 25699 26213 can't read "second": no such variable It is '''important''' to note that the '''c''', '''s''', and '''S''' (and '''i''' and '''I''' on 64bit systems) will be scanned into long data size values. In doing this, values that have their high bit set (0x80 for chars, 0x8000 for shorts, 0x80000000 for ints), will be sign extended. Thus the following will occur: set signShort [binary format s1 0x8000] binary scan $signShort s1 val; # val == 0xFFFF8000 If you want to produce an unsigned value, then you can mask the return value to the desired size. For example, to produce an unsigned short value: set val [expr {$val & 0xFFFF}]; # val == 0x8000 Each type-count pair moves an imaginary cursor through the binary data, reading bytes from the current position. The cursor is initially at position 0 at the beginning of the data. DMG, 2-Dec-03: It is also important to note that the scanning of float types is limited to the "endian" of the scanner. [IEEE binary float to string conversion] provides one way of converting them. Another way is to do a binary scan of the characters, binary format them in the proper order, and binary scan the now native order. ---- DMG, 2-Dec-03: Question: Does anyone know of a way/hack to scan in null terminated strings? I was somewhat surprised to see they were not part of the formatString set as they naturally fall into how Tcl works (well, how it used to). For example, I'm trying to read a file that has a 30-byte space allocated to hold 2 null-terminated strings. 19-Oct-2004: Try set null_term_string [lindex [split $string \000 ] 0] ---- [sbron], 27-Sep-2005: I more frequently need unsigned results from [[binary scan]] than the default signed values. I created my own proc that adds a few new field specifiers that return unsigned values: '''C''' - unsigned byte, '''u''' - unsigned little-endian short, '''U''' - unsigned big-endian short, '''l''' - 32-bit unsigned little endian integer, and '''L''' - 32-bit unsigned big-endian integer. proc binscan {str fmtstr args} { # Create a format string using the built-in signed versions set format [string map {C c u s U S l i L I} $fmtstr] # Split the formatstring into the separate terms set i 0; set vars ""; set fmtlist "" foreach n [regexp -all -inline {[a-wA-W][0-9* ]*} $fmtstr] { lappend fmtlist $n lappend vars term([incr i]) } # Execute the signed binary scan eval [linsert $vars 0 binary scan $str $format] #binary scan $str $format {expand}$vars # Define the mask values to apply to the special format specifiers array set mask {C 0xff u 0xffff U 0xffff l 0xffffffff L 0xffffffff} # Apply the mask and assign the results to the specified variables set i 0 foreach n $fmtlist v $args { set type [string index $n 0] # Link to the variable in the calling stack frame upvar 1 $v var if {[info exists mask($type)]} { set list "" foreach t $term([incr i]) { lappend list [expr {$t & $mask($type)}] } set var $list } else { set var $term([incr i]) } } } [Lars H], 2007-02-20: [TIP]#275 [http://tip.tcl.tk/275] adds something to that end in the standard binary scan command of Tcl 8.5. [kostix], 2007-06-19: another version of '''binary scan''' wrapper that mimics [TIP]#275 for handling of unsigned integers (so note that other enhancements introduced in 8.5 aren't emulated): proc bscan {data f args} { set c 0xFF set s 0xFFFF set S 0xFFFF set i 0xFFFFFFFF set I 0xFFFFFFFF set outf "" set upos {} set pos -1 set last ? foreach a [split $f ""] { if {[string equal $a u] && [string first $last csSiI] >= 0} { lappend upos $pos [set $last] } else { append outf $a if {[string first $a aAbBhHcsSiIwWfdxX@] >= 0} { set last $a incr pos } } } set count [uplevel 1 [list binary scan $data $outf] $args] foreach {pos mask} $upos { upvar 1 [lindex $args $pos] v set v [expr {$v & $mask}] } set count } Works about 10 times slower than '''binary scan''' itself. May be used to provide 8.5 compatibility like this: if {[package vsatisfies $tcl_version 8.5]} { interp alias {} bscan {} binary scan } else { # define the above proc here } Note also that this proc isn't 100% compatible with the real '''binary scan''' since it doesn't do any formal syntax checking of the format string. ---- [DAG] - 30-Jan-2006 - Don't you think there is something wrong in bit handling? If I try to scan a binary content for several binary data, I can get only first part of bytes, but not last. Let's take manual page example: % binary scan \x07\x87\x05 b5b* var1 var2 2 % puts $var1 11100 % puts $var2 1110000110100000 ---- [LV] Here's an attempt to visually explain 00000111 10000111 00000101 If so, then let's see how b5b* ends up with the 2 values: 00000111 10000111 00000101 00000 01111111 00000000 12345 90123456 12345678 becomes var1 var2 11100 11100001 10100000 However, check this out: % binary scan \x07\x87\x05 b* var3 111000001110000110100000 1110 0000 1110 0001 1010 0000 7 0 7 8 5 0 So what appears to be happening is that Tcl doesn't display leading 0's in the binary string. [[later...]] Well, I '''thought''' that was the case... however, check this out: binary scan \xff\xff\xff b5b* var7 var8 2 % puts $var7 11111 % puts $var8 1111111111111111 % string length $var8 16 Shouldn't there be 8*3=24 bits displayed in this case - no leading zeros are present. So why am I not seeing them in the scan? [[Still later...]] Okay, so Miguel just updated tcl-bugs 1663473, regarding the ''missing'' bits. His comment is that, according to the docs, the b5 indicates that the 5 bits are to be read, and that the remaining 3 bits are disguarded - the docs say '''any extra bits in the last byte are ignored'''. Note this extra example that miguel provides! % binary scan \xff\xff\xff b8b* var3 var4 2 % string length $var3 8 % string length $var4 16 [LV] I note here that all 24 bits are present here ... now watch this. % binary scan \xff\xff\xff b9b* var3 var4 2 % string length $var3 9 % string length $var4 8 [LV] See that? by saying b9, one eats one bit of the second byte - the remainder of the bits are ignored, and the b* then eats the third byte. It doesn't appear that binary scan provides the ability to scan parts of a byte into two or more variables. ---- (''[DAG], continued from before LV's insertion'') will return 2 with 11100 stored in var1 and 1110000110100000 stored in var2 and binary scan \x70\x87\x05 B5B* var1 var2 will return 2 with 01110 stored in var1 and 1000011100000101 stored in var2. Now, in both cases, I get 5 bits in first var, and 16 in the second. Since the input is 24 bits long, I am missing 3, and there is no way to get them: binary scan \x70\x87\x05 B5B3B* var1 var2 var3 will return 3 with 01110 stored in var1, 100 stored in var2 and 00000101 stored in var3. This means that 5 bits were taken from byte 1 and the rest skipped, 3 from by byte 2 and the rest skipped, and all bits were taken from byte 3. There is no way, therefore, to have 2 results from binary scan \x87 B4B4 nibble1 nibble2 which would require first half of byte for one variable and the second one for the other, thus having the two part separated. I'd like to have this feature, a lot of algorithm would require it, like data compression or encryption. I use often Tcl to explore binary data structure from libraries in C/C++, like Palm databases, or the like. ---- [LV] Note that I mentioned this desire in the bug report, but the reply by [DKF] was: "The problem is that reading at the bit level across multiple variables would make the code to do bulk uses of [binary scan] much harder since you'd have to allow for someone reading one bit and then 100kB of 32-bit words, all offset by one bit, even though this is a vanishingly rare case." Feel free to visit [https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110894&aid=1663473&group_id=10894] to add your own responses. ---- '''[[continuing discussion]]''' [Lars H]: Agreed. I too got bitten by this a couple of months ago, took me hours to figure out. My current impression is that [binary scan] is generally too simple to be directly useful -- generally one also needs to post-process the data returned. (First read entire byte, then split it up.) Of course, there is this corny method of backing up and then reading the byte again, from the other end: binary scan \x38 B4Xb4 nibble1 nibble2 This will always return one of them backwards, however. ---- [LV] I strongly urge anyone finding such bugs/misfeatures/surprising behaviors in tcl/tk/other extensions to report them as bugs, either in the behavior or in the documentation. Things can only get better if people report things. I've just reported the apparent discrepancy between the man page b5b* example and the behavior as of Tcl 8.5a6, though right now, the response isn't all that encouraging... https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=110894&aid=1663473&group_id=10894 ---- [NickH] Frequently we need to make several calls to binary scan to fully parse input, usualy because of discriminators or counters. Whilst it is obviously possible in principle to keep track of where we are in the scan, in practice it is difficult and/or ugly and the command already knows. I would like to see the formats for both binary scan and binary format extended to allow the extraction of the current byte position. If this were done by adding meaning to @ with no count (currently an error) I can't see how anyone would object (an alternative would be a new format char possibly = or ?) typical use would then be something like: ====== set offset 0 binary scan @${offset}@ offset if {????} { binary scan @${offset}@ offset } else { binary scan @${offset}@ offset } puts "bytes read = $offset" ====== For binary format the use would be contrary to other parameters but it can sometimes be useful for back-patching lengths instead of using string length and expr ---- [AMG]: It bothers me that [[binary scan]] insists on writing to variables rather than simply returning a list. This prevents it from being directly used in a functional context. Well, I just discovered a handy workaround. The key insight is that [[brackets]] perform ''script'' substitution, not merely ''command'' substitution. This means it's legal to put more than one command in a pair of brackets; since it's a script, the commands are delimited by semicolons or newlines. The substituted value is the result of the ''last'' command. Here, see for yourself: ====== set bytes Hello! puts [binary scan $bytes B* tempvar; set tempvar] # 010010000110010101101100011011000110111100100001 ====== More than one conversion? Instead of [[[set]]], use [[[list]]] if a list is desired. Or use [[[format]]] to concatenate the values and format them further. Single-argument [[[lindex]]] may also be useful; it simply returns its argument. ====== set bytes Tcl puts [binary scan $bytes B*X*H* a b; list $a $b] # 010101000110001101101100 54636c puts [binary scan $bytes B*X*H* a b; format "%s = %8s" $a $b] # 010101000110001101101100 = 54636c puts [binary scan $bytes B*X*H* a b; lindex "$a = $b"] # 010101000110001101101100 = 54636c puts [binary scan $bytes B*X*H* a b; lindex [string map {0 o 1 i} $a]$b] # oioioioooiioooiioiioiioo54636c ====== Obviously, [puts] can be replaced by other commands. I'm only using it for demonstration purposes. ---- See also: * [binary] * [binary format] * [format] * [scan] * [IEEE binary float to string conversion] * [NaN] * [Tcl syntax help] <> Command | Binary Data | Parsing | String Processing