News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Hello, PNG. Parent comment

Re:Hello, PNG by Dylan16807 on Wednesday January 18, 2023 @05:55PM (#34434301)
> why is this true of any reasonable compression scheme?

Any? I wouldn't say that. If you took LZ4 and made it even simpler by removing uncompressed chunks, you would only have half a percent of overhead on random data. A thousandth of a percent if you tweaked how it represents large numbers.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Hello, PNG by 082349872349872 on Thursday January 19, 2023 @05:00AM (#34438555)
TIL. IIUC, LZ4 doesn't care about the compression ratio (to which you are correct I had been alluding) but does strongly care about guaranteeing a block maximum size. (so still the same kind of concern, just on an absolute and not a relative basis)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Hello, PNG by Dylan16807 on Thursday January 19, 2023 @05:41AM (#34438861)
Just simplify it further. Get rid of the implicit +4 to the match size. 0-15 instead of 4-19. Now you can guarantee any block size you want.

If you wanted to go even simpler, here's an entire compression format described in one line:

one byte literal length, one byte match length, two bytes match offset, 0-255 literal bytes, repeat

[ Parent | on HN ]