lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Juris Kalnins wrote:
Squish actually uses this as its main output filter,  (there's more
than one, such as the one that replaces Lua keywords with single bytes
> 128) - and it works really well.

And it's very simple to modify llex.c to parse such alternative tokens,
so that reduced scripts can be used directly (btw, Lua also has 20+ unused
bytes from the 0..31 control character range).

I have one query for Matthew, the author of squish. Want to find out (the lazy way) a few data points (always love data points) to get a feel of things:

Does anyone have a set of data points for squish, where we compare data-compressed sizes of sources, where:
(1) keyword token replacement filter, versus
(2) no keyword token replacement

Now, in (2), LZ coding would zap most keywords into a sliding dictionary match code, whereas in (1), the initial size of the filtered sources will be smaller but there is more variation in the symbol frequencies of the source code (token symbols added) and less chance to make sliding dictionary matches.

So, would there be a big difference when we compare compressed sources? Say, we tabulate results as:
(1) original
(2) token filtered
(3) original, compressed
(4) token filtered, compressed

Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia