2006/9/1, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Luke Palmer skribis 2006-08-31 15:48 (-0600):
> > I don't think using a method (even if called "s") is good huffman
> > coding. My expectation is that copying substitution will be used much -
> > perhaps even more than mutating substitution!
> And so a method called "s" is poor huffman coding... why? (I do agree
> with your frequency conjecture)

Because of the awkward syntax that goes with a method: two parens, four
delimiters, comma[s]?.

    .s(/bar/, "baz");  # 20 keypresses on a US keyboard

Minor nit, but:

.s: /bar/,'baz'; # 17 keypresses...


Reply via email to