Your hex editor should color-code bytes

Of course none of this helps those using screen-readers and other tech, so make sure that all your fancy colouring & such is additive so if it is all “lost” no meaning is absolutely lost with it.

--------

[1] Some people can be very vocal about this, more so than if highlighting isn't possible at all. If you give any output formatting they'll expect you to match, or be able to be made to match, their preferred style.

Its a hex editor built with imgui and has a lot of built in tools. Imo the best feature is the data structure editor. You can write a data type definition similar to C and it overlays it on the hexdump and parses it in a structured way while you type.

It also has a node based editor.

1: https://github.com/WerWolv/ImHex

If that’s true, how does the tool know I will be looking for C0 bytes and not for 03, D3, etc? The logical conclusion of that would be that the hex editor should uniquely color code every byte. And following the other examples even that’s not enough.

The proposed solution is to create groups of byte values that each get their unique color. I think that helps, but we can do better: add a search feature. That tells your editor what you are looking for. Once you enter a search string, it can highlight all hits.

Yes, “colorful output in a hexdump is useful for the same reason that syntax highlighting for code is useful”, but do you know what syntax highlighting needs? Knowledge of the expected content of a file. Without that, a hex editor at best can guess at how to color-code stuff.

IMO, if you want to add syntax coloring to a hex editor, give it pluggable syntax coloring and heuristics for deciding which one to use when.

While at it, also let those plugins control where to break lines, whether to show hex at all (why show it at all if a file has a few paragraphs of English text or an array of IEEE doubles?), etc.

Those plug-ins will make errors and sometimes, users will want to see all byte values, so you’ll need a way for the user to override them.

color-coding might be a great solution, but you don't really know beforehand which byte values are important. Manually selecting C0 to make it stand out it just ctrl+f with extra steps. (But I wouldn't mind something like "color 00 separate from ascii separate from the rest)

The implicit cost here is that the simple patterns become harder to recognize when every byte is only subtly differently colored. Rather than give everything a different color, I'd rather have the important stuff highlighted.

In the comparisons given, I think hexyl's highlighting scheme is significantly more useful.

  > Your hex editor should colour-code bytes so it is easier for users to distinguish patterns
  > Article is fully in lowercase, which makes it harder for readers to make out sentences and the flow of the article
  > mfw the irony

The post put on the table an interesting point about how to improve the presentation layer to fit what’s human cognition is good at spotting (in general, or at least for the expected audience with some training). And it does start proposing something with these color schemes. But isn’t it kind of missing the forest for the tree? Actually why do we even have rendering with [012345678ABCDEF], when a specific set of (colored/imaged?) glyphs would be able to make more obvious what’s on the table? Or even beyond the hexadecimal grouping, wouldn’t be more relevant to render something "intuitively" far more easy to grap without several layer of internalized interpretation through acculturation?

But color would be nice more based on the bytes logic.

Eventually the 00 in a shaded grey instead of black, and in best case scenario by logic unit based on your protocol. And worst case scenario by groups of words or so.

https://github.com/sharkdp/hexyl

The cool thing about it imo (outside of colors) is a `--windows` flag. Which separates the hex view into partitions: so `-w 2:-3:5` shows the first two bytes on a line, then skips three bytes, then shows the next 5 bytes on a line, then the rest of the file. Easy to use combined with a terminal's up arrow.

Don't really see the advantage. Unique bytes have no unique meaning across data types.

The only good syntax highlight to me is 00 and perhaps FF. But that's my opinion of course.

Anything else that has no direct relation to what you're looking at is meaningless.

It's been a while since I used hexedit on Linux, but I think that highlighted search results in reverse colours, just like less does for text search. Personally, I'd prefer that to colours.