- From: Adrian Cole <adrian.f.cole@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2014 13:11:28 -0800
- To: Gábor Molnár <gabor.molnar@sch.bme.hu>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Received on Friday, 31 January 2014 21:11:55 UTC
Thanks for the inputs. So, seems case-by-case, with most decisions being relatively static. if huffmanNotDisabledDueToSomeCPUConcern and worthItToCheckLengthWithAndWithoutHuffman and foundHuffmanShorter huffmanEncode Is that a fair summary? I'm guessing that in most cases, you'll have a buffer with a known length, so above comparison is probably worth it in most cases. -A On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Gábor Molnár <gabor.molnar@sch.bme.hu>wrote: > There are cases when encoding without Huffman simply produces smaller > input (for example, if your header value consists of uncommon letters or > binary data). > > > 2014-01-31 Adrian Cole <adrian.f.cole@gmail.com>: > > Hi, all. >> >> HPACK allows the sender to decide whether or not to encode with huffman. >> When, in your opinion, would the sender choose not to? >> >> -A >> > >
Received on Friday, 31 January 2014 21:11:55 UTC