Paul Moore <p.f.mo...@gmail.com> writes: > On 24 October 2017 at 11:23, Ben Bacarisse <ben.use...@bsb.me.uk> wrote: >> For example, run the complete works of Shakespeare through your program. >> The result is very much not random data, but that's the sort of data >> people want to compress. If you can compress the output of your >> compressor you have made a good start. Of course what you really want >> to be able to do is to compress the output that results from compressing >> your compressed out. And, of course, you should not stop there. Since >> you can compress *any* data (not just the boring random stuff) you can >> keep going -- compressing the compressed output again and again until >> you end up with a zero-length file. > > Oh, and just for fun, if you are able to guarantee compressing > arbitrary data, then
It's a small point, but you are replying to a post of mine and saying "you". That could make people think that /I/ am claiming to have a perfect compression algorithm. > 1. Take a document you want to compress. > 2. Compress it using your magic algorithm. The result is smaller. > 3. Compress the compressed data. The result is still smaller. > 4. Repeat until you hit 0 bytes. Isn't this just repeating what I said? I must has not written is clearly enough. <snip> -- Ben. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list