News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Consider using Zstandard and/or LZ4 instead of Deflate. Parent comment

Re:Consider using Zstandard and/or LZ4 instead of Deflate by hinkley on Tuesday August 05, 2025 @04:02PM (#44803513)
You think LZ4 is more portable than zlib? I'm gonna need some citations on that.

zlib is 30 years old, according to Wikipedia. And that's technically wrong since 'zlib' was factored out of gzip (nearly 33 years old) for use in libpng, which is also 30 years old.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Consider using Zstandard and/or LZ4 instead of Deflate by adgjlsfhk1 on Tuesday August 05, 2025 @04:28PM (#44803823)
not more portable, but probably faster in resource constrained environments
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Consider using Zstandard and/or LZ4 instead of Deflate by duskwuff on Tuesday August 05, 2025 @04:31PM (#44803861)
A basic LZ4 decompressor is on the order of a few dozen lines of code. It's exceptionally easy to implement.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Consider using Zstandard and/or LZ4 instead of Deflate by moonshadow565 on Tuesday August 05, 2025 @10:10PM (#44806877)
Just because its old doesn't mean it's more portable. If anything it makes me think it's even less portable.
[ Parent | on HN ]