Status Page Dll's --My Status :)
Gregory M. Turner
gmturner007 at ameritech.net
Tue Jun 17 01:15:58 CDT 2003
On Tuesday 17 June 2003 12:43 am, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> Gregory M. Turner wrote:
> >But encoding is inherently harder to implement than
> >decoding (there's a lot more "to do", and usually no single right answer,
> > so you never know when you're done).
> Every book, software and piece of common knowledge tells me that
> decoding is WAY more difficult. "Be restrictive in what you produce, and
> permissive in what you accept" means that, when decoding, you need to
> accept broken encodings too, as well as encodings that took a different
> path than the one you would take (different algorithm, different
> paramters, optional parameters, etc). When encoding, you need to select
> a single path and go that way.
Hmm, that's a good point, I never thought of it that way. I guess I was
thinking in terms of computational complexity, but from a
difficulty-of-implementation perspective (which is what I was intending to
address), I think you are right, I have it backwards above. In this
particular case, however, the fact that the decompression code was gifted to
us probably nevertheless reverses the relative labor requirements we would
expect based on that principle.
"Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant
that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it."
-- Thomas Sowell
More information about the wine-devel