Dear Jan-Hein, I read through the discussion, but until you said it directly, I did not realize that you wanted feedback on your *python* code.
In that case, let me note a few things which make it unlikely that you will get (usable) feedback: 1. The code on your website is not formatted and highlighted properly. This makes it hard to read. Of course, people can copy-paste it into their favourite highlighter, but that poses a hurdle some (including me) do not want to take, because of ... 2. ... we don’t exactly know how the algorithm is supposed to work. Unfortunately (and I’m quite sure that this is not due to the fact that you’re not native english, because I was able to follow your mails without issues), your description of the algorithm on your blog is full of typos and incomplete or ambiguous grammar. It could also use some mathematical typesetting to make it more readable. I propose that you reformat both your description of the algorithm and your implementation to get a better review on it. In fact, I am quite curious about it (having implemented a MIDI-ish format I stole from Matroska without knowing, for my pet binary storage format, where I need small (less than 8 bit) at a number of occasions), but currently I don’t have the time to dig through it if it doesn’t read fluently (there are exams over here). I assume that many other people also have much other stuff to do. Another idea to make it more attractive for people to review your code (if you are not after a functional review) would be to go to, e.g., <https://codereview.stackexchange.com>. I am not quite sure whether it would be "on-topic" there -- it would probably require a concise description of the algorithm so that people can make their own mind-model about how the algorithm is *supposed* to work and how your code works, to compare and see potential for optimization, code wise. best regards, jwi p.s.: On your website: > The natural character size is 2 bits, and that will eventually become > the standard. What is it with that statement? That bugged me when I visited the page for the first time. Just marketing-wise, I believe you should not confront people with a controversial statement, taking it for granted, on the first glance. It would be better to state that this is your implementation of Algorithm A (link to concise description included) and you would like to get feedback on your implementation or whatever.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
