Re: Reasons to not use huffman encoding?

FWIW, I would rather not use Huffman encoding at all, just to reduce the complexity of implementation.  IMHO it doesn't offer a compelling improvement in overall header compression...

On Jan 31, 2014, at 4:11 PM, Adrian Cole <adrian.f.cole@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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
> 
> 

_________________________________________________________
Michael Sweet, Senior Printing System Engineer, PWG Chair