Re: A look at some alternative PACK file encodings
- From
- linux@horizon.com <linux@horizon.com>
- Date
- Sep 7, 2006, 19:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060907191622.7597.qmail@science.horizon.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609071228560.18635@xanadu.home>
> So I don't think we would gain that much using that encoding > unless/until the pack format is made completely incompatible due to > other changes, and that's something we should try to avoid as much as > possible anyway.
Ah, I'm sorry; I didn't realize that it was already used elsewhere in the pack format and this was just code re-use. That is indeed a good reason to stick with what's already there.
I agree the savings are minimal, but if you're starting from scratch, they're free, so why not use them? I tried to show that the code complexity is truly negligible.
I'm sorry I didn't realize the details of pack structure before.