Re: Lua bytecode doesn't compress well (with LZMA)

[KHMan <keinhong@...>]

Matthew Wild wrote:
> 2009/12/1 KHMan:
> > Juris Kalnins wrote:
> > > > [snip]
> > > > > [snip]
> > > [snip]
> > 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
>
> I'm working on a new release, and it will include these statistics (as
> a pretty graph using my <another-plug>Google Charts API lib:
> http://code.matthewwild.co.uk/gchart/ </another-plug> ;) ).

Looking forward to it :-)

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