Re: Suggest a compression technique
- From: "cr88192" <cr88192@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 00:47:35 +1000
"Earl Colby Pottinger" <earlcolby.pottinger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:wWDcg.1072$%Z2.155309@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Wrecked" <rithesh.rg@xxxxxxxxx> :adding to this, depending on the nature of the data, it may also make some
Kindly suggest me some good methords to compress a string set which is
always atmost 160 bytes (160 characters). Is there any worthwhile gain
at all considering that the size of the data to be compressed is quite
small.
Is it always ascii text? Strip off the high bit. Is it always English?
Use
a static huffman table to compress.
First, what is needed is some idea of the nature of the data stored in
those
160 bytes.
sense to use a static dictionary approach as well.
likewise, depending on the nature and usage of the strings, it may be
possible to sort the strings and then to seperate each string into a prefix
and suffix related to the previous string.
this would be work best, most likely, eg, for things like filenames, but
would do poorly for most other things (text, ...).
....
assuming it generally possible to work with a whole group of such strings,
conventional compressors (eg: deflate) may also be a possible option.
Earl Colby Pottinger
--
<Cruising, building a Catamaran, Rebuilding Cabin, New Peroxide Still
Design,
Writting SF, Programming FOSS - What happened to the time?>
.
- References:
- Suggest a compression technique
- From: Wrecked
- Re: Suggest a compression technique
- From: Earl Colby Pottinger
- Suggest a compression technique
- Prev by Date: Re: Three broken compressors
- Next by Date: Re: New large text benchmark
- Previous by thread: Re: Suggest a compression technique
- Next by thread: Re: Suggest a compression technique
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
