On Jul 15, 2018, at 8:47 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@bec.de> wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 05:24:26PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: >> On Jul 14, 2018, at 2:18 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@bec.de> wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 03:27:14PM -0600, Warren Young wrote: >>>> >>>> For example, 100 a’s requires a 7-bit run-length plus zero bits for our >>>> only code point >>> >>> You need more than zero bits to encode the original a though. >> >> There’s only one letter in this alphabet, so all we need is a run length >> to say how many of them there are in our message. > > You are kind of making my point for me. You are adding a priori > knowledge of a single letter alphabet in a context where this assumption > makes no natural sense. By that line of reasoning, you can also assume > knowledge that passwords are always a multiple of size n and the entropy > would be near zero…
I’m taking inspiration from Huffman coding here, so you actually need 7 bits for the length prefix + sizeof(dictionary_with_one_entry). _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
