Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!twwells!bill
From: bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: _doscan
Message-ID: <1989Nov10.193301.8315@twwells.com>
Date: 10 Nov 89 19:33:01 GMT
References: <21404@adm.BRL.MIL> <20645@mimsy.umd.edu>
Organization: None, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Lines: 26

In article <20645@mimsy.umd.edu> chris@mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek) writes:
: Using _doscan in code that is not part of the stdio library is, to
: paraphrase Dennis Ritchie, `unwarranted chumminess with the implementation'.

That, I'm afraid, is going to require me to completely rewrite one
of my favorite little utilites:

	scanprt [options] <scanf-string> <printf-string>

with a few useful options (controlling whether the scanf is
fgets/sscanf or scanf, whether the printf has a newline after it,
etc.)

I wrote it way back when for blank filling in some shell scripts,
as in: scanprt %s %-10s. I've used it as a stage in a cheap
binary editor: hd file >somewhere; <edit>; cut -c9-56 somewhere |
scanprt -n -l0 %x %c >file.new. I've used it for number
conversions, e.g., on the output of cmp -l: cmp -l foo bar |
scanprt %d%o%o '%X %X %X', etc.

Oh well, the internals of that thing are ugly anyway. I suppose
it was time for a rewrite. :-)

---
Bill                    { uunet | novavax | ankh | sunvice } !twwells!bill
bill@twwells.com