Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[feature request] Optimize input encoding schemes (base64, etc.) #549

Closed
buu700 opened this issue May 21, 2017 · 2 comments
Closed

[feature request] Optimize input encoding schemes (base64, etc.) #549

buu700 opened this issue May 21, 2017 · 2 comments

Comments

@buu700
Copy link

buu700 commented May 21, 2017

I'm not extremely familiar with the internals of Brotli or compression in general, so this may be a naive suggestion, but intuitively I think it aligns philosophically with Brotli's use of a built-in dictionary. Would it be practical for a future version of Brotli to detect strings of formats like base64 and hex and decode them to binary before compressing / re-encode them as part of the decompression process?

I noticed just now during a comparison between compressing a binary file and the equivalent base64 (emscripten-core/emscripten#5104 (comment)) that the base64 version ended up larger, which it occurs to me shouldn't need to be the case given that the two contain almost exactly the same information.

@buu700 buu700 changed the title Encoding formats [feature request] Optimize input encoding schemes (base64, etc.) May 21, 2017
@eustas
Copy link
Collaborator

eustas commented May 21, 2017

Thanks for the suggestion, but we tend to keep brotli compressor pure.
This is a feature for brotli framing format: #462.
Could you place your FR into framing format discussion, please.

@eustas eustas closed this as completed May 21, 2017
@buu700
Copy link
Author

buu700 commented May 21, 2017

Got it, thanks, I'll post it there.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants