You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

gwern comments on Does Checkers have simpler rules than Go? - Less Wrong Discussion

14 Post author: jkaufman 13 August 2013 02:09AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (46)

Comments (46)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: gwern 28 October 2013 10:24:30PM 1 point [-]

Maybe xz, the implementation I used, has big headers?

Maybe. Does performance improve when you disable the default CRC-64 integrity check with --check=none?

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 28 October 2013 10:57:47PM 2 points [-]

I tried and that's only 8 bytes, a single checksum. I'm seeing 50-100 more bytes for xz than gz on all of them, from the smallest hex-sm.py to the largest checkers.py.

Then I read the man page. It mentions "the filter chain...which normally would be stored in the container headers," which could be it, but doesn't sound like a lot of bytes. Also, I discovered another option: --format=lzma gets checkers almost all the way down to gz (xz,lzma,gz=1864,1826,1821), but gets hex-sm only halfway (xz,lzma,gz=428,391,356). (xz meaning without checksum)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit