Rocksolid Light

Welcome to RetroBBS

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Last yeer I kudn't spel Engineer. Now I are won.


devel / comp.compression / Is Stac compression really that bad?

SubjectAuthor
o Is Stac compression really that bad?Harry Potter

1
Is Stac compression really that bad?

<289f817d-422b-4409-8b5d-a5814f151d35n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.rocksolidbbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=1074&group=comp.compression#1074

  copy link   Newsgroups: comp.compression
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:ab4:b0:649:fc3d:7659 with SMTP id ew20-20020a0562140ab400b00649fc3d7659mr12923qvb.12.1692460241076;
Sat, 19 Aug 2023 08:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:c92:b0:68a:ab8:e3c1 with SMTP id
a18-20020a056a000c9200b0068a0ab8e3c1mr1384699pfv.2.1692460239888; Sat, 19 Aug
2023 08:50:39 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.compression
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2023 08:50:39 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=173.68.2.174; posting-account=xRocggoAAACFej4w6sQauoZjUP9yroE5
NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.68.2.174
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <289f817d-422b-4409-8b5d-a5814f151d35n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Is Stac compression really that bad?
From: rose.joseph12@yahoo.com (Harry Potter)
Injection-Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2023 15:50:41 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 1746
 by: Harry Potter - Sat, 19 Aug 2023 15:50 UTC

Hi! I have a version of the Stac compression technique on which I've been working, and, well, it sucks. A 13.8k file that is a text adventure for an old computer compresses to 7,801 bytes on Deflate and 7,364 on WinMount but, at last test, my rendition of Stac gave me 8,210 bytes. Right now, the only thing I'm doing that's not in the specification is Deflate's lazy mechanism where, if the next byte in an LZ77 scan produces better results, code the current byte as a literal. I have ways to make it better but prefer my renditions/enhancements of the XZ0 technique. BTW, I'm using the Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lempel%E2%80%93Ziv%E2%80%93Stac as a reference.

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.8
clearnet tor