On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Jonas Sicking <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 5:15 PM, Glenn Maynard <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm not aware of any optimized inflate implementation in JS to compare > > against, and it's a complex algorithm, so nobody is likely to jump > forward > > to spend a lot of time implementing and heavily optimizing it just to > show > > how slow it is. I've seen an implementation around somewhere, but it > didn't > > use typed arrays so it would need a lot of reworking to have any meaning. > > Likewise, I don't see any browser vendor jumping ahead and doing both > the work to implement a library *and* and API to compare the two. > Sorry, this didn't make sense. What "library *and* API" are you talking about? To compare what? > Every browser already has native inflate, though. > > This is unfortunately not a terribly strong argument. Exposing that > implementation through a DOM API requires a fairly large amount of > work. Not to add maintaining that over the years. > You're arguing for allowing accessing files inside ZIPs by URL, which means you're going to have to do the work anyway, since you'd be able to create a blob URL, reference a file inside it using XHR, and get a Blob as a result. This is a small subset of that. -- Glenn Maynard
