3 ms·
> Why don’t we Because we don't need to and we have much more interesting problems to take up our time.
by RobAley 6y ago
> Why don’t we
Because we don't need to and we have much more interesting problems to take up our time.
- darkwater 6y agoBut GP already solved the problem (at least for English and other Latin script languages). Why throw away those findings?
- devenblake 6y agoProblems tend to have more than one solution. GP's solution should be documented, yes, but the alternate solution that won out was computers being capable of storing a million words or so in plaintext very easily, and doing the same using their compression scheme just isn't really worth the space saved nowadays.
- ASalazarMX 6y agoAlso, compressing could actually be slower for modern computers. Remember when compressing your hard disk made your PC faster, up until disks became faster, then it actually made it slower? Today's CPUs are very fast, so the trend could have flipped again, that would be an interesting benchmark.
- RobAley 6y agoImplementation takes time. Keep it simple and move on.