in reply to How to efficently pack a string of 63 characters

Ironically, you might reduce the efficiency of the compression, because you have squeezed out the "redundancy" upon which text compression algorithms depend. Simply stated, these algorithms recognize "a sequence that we have recently seen before," and replace them with a coded reference to that sequence. Your pre-processing might remove that redundancy, reducing or even eliminating the chance to substitute codes. However, there's really only one way to find out: an empirical test. Generate a few thousand bits of plausibly representative data (unless you have the real stuff at hand), and try it both ways.
  • Comment on Re: How to efficently pack a string of 63 characters

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: How to efficently pack a string of 63 characters
by LanX (Saint) on Sep 08, 2021 at 21:18 UTC
    True but "hand optimized" might be more efficient than automatically packed, because human heuristic might find unusual patterns.

    We will only be able to tell after the OP provided us with more typical sample data.

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery