Re: Huffman coding in pure Perl

The main inefficiency is that bit operations are not really bit operations; rather, the module uses ASCII strings of 0s and 1s, and only packs it into a real bit string after the encoded string has been constructed. ...

On the encoding side, it is only slightly harder to build the bit vector directly, using vec() instead of pack 'b'.

sub huff1 {
    my ( $string, $codes) = @_;

    my ( $ret, $len) = ( '', 0); # $len counts bits
    for ( split( //, $string), '_eos' ) {
        vec( $ret, $len ++, 1) = $_ for split //, $codes->{ $_};
    }
    return $ret;
}
[download]

The decoding side is harder.

Update: No, it isn't. Dehuff is as easily adapted to vec().

sub dehuff1 {
    my ( $string, $code) = @_;
    my %decode = reverse %$code;
    my ( $ret, $c, $where) = ( '', '', 0);
    while ( 1 ) {
        $c .= vec( $string, $where ++, 1);
        next unless exists $decode{ $c};
        last if $decode{ $c} eq '_eos';
        $ret .= $decode{ $c};
        $c = '';
    }
    return $ret;
}
[download]

Anno

Comment on Re: Huffman coding in pure Perl Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Huffman coding in pure Perl by vrk (Chaplain) on Mar 04, 2007 at 19:46 UTC
I know. I originally had `vec` in mind, but doing the decoding that way felt like too much of a drag, and I don't really need this module. The current implementation is arguably easier to understand, which was what I wanted to do: understand the algorithm. -- print "Just Another Perl Adept\n";	[reply] [d/l]


more useful options
	PerlMonks