- From: Frédéric Kayser <f.kayser@free.fr>
- Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 10:01:25 +0200
- To: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
- Message-Id: <3D0CEF94-7A8C-4B38-8242-CDC582A67F0C@free.fr>

Hello, I have a pretty dumb question regarding integer representation isn't it easier to grasp expressed as binary masking and right shifts? This should be the same I % 128 becomes I & 127 I / 128 becomes I >> 7 And wouldn't it be way easier and faster to record/reconstruct such integers by moving all the flags (most significant bits) of each byte in front of the code? I < 128 0xxxxxxx I < 16.384 10xxxxxx xxxxxxxx (compared to 1yyyyyyy 0yyyyyyy groups of 7 least significant bits first) I < 2.097.152 110xxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx (compared to 1yyyyyyy 1yyyyyyy 0yyyyyyy groups of 7 least significant bits first) I < 268.435.456 1110xxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx (compared to 1yyyyyyy 1yyyyyyy 1yyyyyyy 0yyyyyyy groups of 7 least significant bits first) â€¦ Where xxxâ€¦xxx is simply the binary representation of I The first part looks like unary coding and the overall form of this encoding is a 7, 7, âˆž start-step-code or a base 128 Elias Î³â€² code, do you really want to keep the universal nature of such a code or cap it? Regards -- FrÃ©dÃ©ric Kayser

Received on Friday, 18 October 2013 08:01:52 UTC