Anonymous user
Talk:Run-length encoding: Difference between revisions
m
Correct my comment (not a native speaker...)
No edit summary |
m (Correct my comment (not a native speaker...)) |
||
Line 8:
::Woah! I didn't expect the page to take off this fast.
::To be honest, I was just annoyed that the Wikipedia page had too much example code, but thought it would be a waste to just delete it, so I copied it over here, where I thought it might do some good. It's true that the task as it stands isn't formulated very well -- my goal was mostly to preserve the code from Wikipedia, which differed in how much it could encode (e.g. digits) and what it did output (String vs. Nested Array/List), but if the community is this active, it may be beneficial to just change the definition to require the implementations to be able to deal with arbitrary byte sequences as input, and/or require strings as output.
::I did not exactly specify the way to encode the input because there were
::# Out of Band (as the task is described currently, with digits always signifying a run-length)
::# Escape character followed by run-length and run-character (e.g. AB\C3 -> ABCCC)
::## Escape character changes after every occurance in the input (in the hope of finding an unused character)
::# Two (or three, or ''x'') characters are always followed by the run-length (e.g. AA3 -> AAAAA)
::And you can encode the run-length itself differently for very long runs (multiple escape-sequences vs.
::: -- [[User:DataWraith|DataWraith]] 14:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
| |||