// At this point, I'd like to take a moment to speak to you about the Adobe PSD format.
  // PSD is not a good format. PSD is not even a bad format. Calling it such would be an
  // insult to other bad formats, such as PCX or JPEG. No, PSD is an abysmal format. Having
  // worked on this code for several weeks now, my hate for PSD has grown to a raging fire
  // that burns with the fierce passion of a million suns.
  // If there are two different ways of doing something, PSD will do both, in different
  // places. It will then make up three more ways no sane human would think of, and do those
  // too. PSD makes inconsistency an art form. Why, for instance, did it suddenly decide
  // that *these* particular chunks should be aligned to four bytes, and that this alignement
  // should *not* be included in the size? Other chunks in other places are either unaligned,
  // or aligned with the alignment included in the size. Here, though, it is not included.
  // Either one of these three behaviours would be fine. A sane format would pick one. PSD,
  // of course, uses all three, and more.
  // Trying to get data out of a PSD file is like trying to find something in the attic of
  // your eccentric old uncle who died in a freak freshwater shark attack on his 58th
  // birthday. That last detail may not be important for the purposes of the simile, but
  // at this point I am spending a lot of time imagining amusing fates for the people
  // responsible for this Rube Goldberg of a file format.
  // Earlier, I tried to get a hold of the latest specs for the PSD file format. To do this,
  // I had to apply to them for permission to apply to them to have them consider sending
  // me this sacred tome. This would have involved faxing them a copy of some document or
  // other, probably signed in blood. I can only imagine that they make this process so
  // difficult because they are intensely ashamed of having created this abomination. I
  // was naturally not gullible enough to go through with this procedure, but if I had done
  // so, I would have printed out every single page of the spec, and set them all on fire.
  // Were it within my power, I would gather every single copy of those specs, and launch
  // them on a spaceship directly into the sun.
  //
  // PSD is not my favourite file format.

I speculate that one of the ways this happens is that someone decides or is told to use format Foo. Then they and possible collaborators implement both the writer and the reader for their idea of Foo from scratch, never testing with an off-the-shelf standard parser.

You'd think that doing XML like this is unlikely, given how easily available correct and validating parsers have been. But I've nevertheless seen this with XML too. I speculate that sometimes the programmer is on a platform that doesn't have an easily available off-the-shelf parser/writer, or they simply don't know about it.

I've also seen a variation of this, in half-butted "integrations", like to have a sales check-off feature of "we can generate X". These are sometimes tested only lightly, and sometimes not at all (such as when they don't have access to the tool that uses that format, and they were just working from poor documentation or an example). It's a thing.

Good grief. It's like writing assembly: a good exercise, but only for trivial or particularly tricky parts of a program. For everything else, proper tooling (a compiler or a 3D modeler) is the way to go. I fully agree that the best learning experience is to build tools to automate away the annoying parts :-D

Where I throw stones at myself is that I have a "perfect is the enemy of good" problem in that I don't publish writeups that are incomplete, because I keep hoping that if I just spend more holidays banging on it then I'll figure out why the parser works most of the time

This is the post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38772862

First, make sure that you know what the format is actually supposed to encode. For example, if some file weighs (say) 40 KB then it is unlikely to be a raster image. The file name, if any, helps a lot to narrow the scope.

Second, you should have some understanding of similar file formats. I generally recommend to study PNG first because it gives an example of typical structured file formats and raster image formats. (Don't delve into the compression though---bitwise analysis is much harder.) This is also why you needed to know what the format is for, many formats with the same goal tend to have similar structures.

Third, collect as many examples as possible. You can line them up to see commonalities and differences and spot patterns. Even better if you can actively generate different files. This is generally the last hope when you are run out of reasonable hypotheses.

Fourth, optimize the feedback loop. You will have to do a lot of hypothesization, validation and automation. You can't really optimize the number of iterations, but you can optimize the time for a single iteration. Use a comfortable scripting language with good binary operation. I tend to use a vanilla Python with struct and make everything else by my own, but there are several libraries that greatly help you if you don't feel like doing so.

But first, it helps to have sample files to see recurring structures. Ideally, you also have access to software that generates these files. This allows you to deal with simpler files containing less information to reason about, make small changes within the program and compare the corresponding change(s) in the file.

i've never attempted JS interop, so i don't know how much it sucks, but it definitely seems doable. it'll likely be an adventure on it's own, but it's gotta be 1000x less fuckery than trying to reverse the binary format of Access

the saner option would probably just be a small .Net program that creates an endpoint for your JS

unless i'm assuming too much, and you're just doing it for sheer masochistic pleasure, and in that case: i salute you