Re: Straw Poll: Restore Header Table and Static Table Indices

On Oct 15, 2014, at 12:20 AM, Amos Jeffries <squid3@treenet.co.nz> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 15/10/2014 6:11 p.m., Adrian Cole wrote:
>>> If an argument can be made that 2 byte encodings are still too
>>> large for dynamic headers, then instead of flipping back let's
>>> investigate how the 1 byte slots can be shared between static and
>>> dynamic.
>> FWIW, I'm happy to implement an alternate approach, if one comes
>> out. Thanks, Greg.
>> 
> 
> Alternative approach has already been proposed. That the first bit of
> the index is used as a flag to indicate static or dynamic table for
> the remaning 7+ bits.
> 
> That not only puts both on an even bias, but expands the range of
> values getting 1-byte encodings in either table and removes the need
> for the math complexity people are disliking.
> 
> 1 stone, 3 birds.
> 

Another option I suggested awhile back (in case it was forgotten) is that there could be a control code (much like the table size code), which can be set to set the table ordering. Then a compressor can decide which is most advantageous for the data set. I like your idea better but if for some reason we can’t lose the bit, this would be a way.

--
Jason T. Greene
WildFly Lead / JBoss EAP Platform Architect
JBoss, a division of Red Hat

Received on Wednesday, 15 October 2014 21:52:18 UTC