From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Aug 27 08:50:05 2020 Received: (at 42162) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Aug 2020 12:50:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42064 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kBHLw-0005Oe-Sb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:50:05 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52292) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kBHLt-0005Nk-0o for 42162@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:50:03 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51916) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kBHLm-0007j1-Fa; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:49:54 -0400 Received: from [2001:660:6102:320:e120:2c8f:8909:cdfe] (port=41772 helo=ribbon) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kBHLl-0001Kd-QN; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:49:54 -0400 From: =?utf-8?Q?Ludovic_Court=C3=A8s?= To: zimoun Subject: Re: bug#42162: Recovering source tarballs References: <87mu4iv0gc.fsf@inria.fr> <86h7uq8fmk.fsf@gmail.com> <87d05etero.fsf@gnu.org> <87r1tit5j6.fsf_-_@gnu.org> <875za4ykej.fsf@ngyro.com> <86blixyb7c.fsf@gmail.com> <87k0xlaz8p.fsf@ngyro.com> <86lfi0e88r.fsf@gmail.com> X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 11 Fructidor an 228 de la =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=A9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0x090B11993D9AEBB5 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3CE4 6455 8A84 FDC6 9DB4 0CFB 090B 1199 3D9A EBB5 X-OS: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2020 14:49:51 +0200 In-Reply-To: <86lfi0e88r.fsf@gmail.com> (zimoun's message of "Thu, 27 Aug 2020 11:41:24 +0200") Message-ID: <87lfi0tfrk.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 42162 Cc: 42162@debbugs.gnu.org, Timothy Sample , Maurice =?utf-8?Q?Br=C3=A9mond?= X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Hi! zimoun skribis: > Moreover, the format is a long list, e.g., > > (headers > ((name "raptor2-2.0.15/") > (mode 493) > (mtime 1414909500) > (chksum 4225) > (typeflag 53)) > ((name "raptor2-2.0.15/build/") > (mode 493) > (mtime 1414909497) > (chksum 4797) > (typeflag 53)) > ((name "raptor2-2.0.15/build/ltversion.m4") > (size 690) > (mtime 1414908273) > (chksum 5958)) > > [=E2=80=A6]) > > which is human-readable. Is it useful? > > > Instead, one could imagine shorter keywords: > > ((na "raptor2-2.0.15/") > (mo 493) > (mt 1414909500) > (ch 4225) > (ty 53)) > > which using your database (commit fc50927) reduces from 295MB to 279MB. I think it=E2=80=99s nice, at least at this stage, that it=E2=80=99s human-readable=E2=80=94=E2=80=9Cpremature optimization is the root of all e= vil=E2=80=9D. :-) I guess it won=E2=80=99t be difficult to make the format more dense eventua= lly if that is deemed necessary, using =E2=80=98write=E2=80=99 instead of =E2= =80=98pretty-print=E2=80=99, using tricks like you write, or even going binary as a last resort. Ludo=E2=80=99.