Hi guys, > this is also caused by the 1)3)2)-order (see my earlier mail). The > regular algorithm resets the dictionary before adding entry 4097. It > outputs a code that we output after reset. With +1 the output gets right. > > But don't we miss a dictionary entry? (last one in old dict (#4097), > that should be in the new dict) Maybe this is a bug.
I am following your conversation and I must admit I do not understand the need for these changes nor the precise nature of this 1-2-3/1-3-2 problem. It was too long ago that I implemented that code... I will try to find some time re-read the standard and the code. Do you have also test cases that fail without the changes and succeed otherwise? JP
