Am 17.11.2012 um 12:12 schrieb Marnaud <[email protected]>:

> Le 17 nov. 2012 à 10:15, Christian Schmitz a écrit:
> 
>> I'd simply use zlib with level 9.
>> But it'S not wrong to have a flag in your data which says what mode you use 
>> like 0 for not compressed, 1 for zlib and 2 for bzip and 3 for lzw.
> 
> Ok, thanks. since yesterday, I've added a parameter (argument of my console 
> app) so I could specify the compression (this value is stored in the file, of 
> course). Ideally, I'd like to avoid “bad” compression methods which would 
> sometimes fail (like one with a reputation of not always decompressing 
> right). Are there unreliable compressions in these above? Or is it always 
> more risked to use compression?

none is unreliable.

>> So your app could see which one is the smallest and store that. Sometimes 
>> uncompressed is smallest :-)
> 
> Really? I didn't expected that. What I could do is have 4 variables in code, 
> one for each compression (and for no compression) and always save the one 
> that is the smallest. But that would fill the RAM quickly (when copying big 
> files).
> Ok, at least I'm going to compare the file sizes. Thank you.

Good. Well a compressed file compressed again is normally bigger.

Greetings
Christian

-- 
Read our blog about news on our plugins:

http://www.mbsplugins.de/

_______________________________________________
Mbsplugins_monkeybreadsoftware.info mailing list
[email protected]
https://ml01.ispgateway.de/mailman/listinfo/mbsplugins_monkeybreadsoftware.info

Reply via email to