Fast Brute (test)

[Razor12911]

Originally Posted by felice2011

A real disadvantage is compiled in this way, the compression time is too high, and certainly also the decompression time, you have to find the right balance for all, and give the user the ability to choose its own level of compression, in this way "brute" will not make a long way, I'm sorry mate.

Dude. "give the user the ability to choose its own level of compression"
This doesn't make sense, how can you add level for decompression? Brute is not reflate or made based on raw2hif, level setting is something that reflate does itself, brute on the other hand is search every byte then decompress.imagine a 794mb file, it has 832 618 624 bytes, brute must use trial and error for every single of those bytes starting from 1 to file size, brute checks about 200000 bytes per second on my cpu, I dont think that is slow.

[felice2011]

Originally Posted by Razor12911

Dude. "give the user the ability to choose its own level of compression"
This doesn't make sense, how can you add level for decompression? Brute is not reflate or made based on raw2hif, level setting is something that reflate does itself, brute on the other hand is search every byte then decompress.imagine a 794mb file, it has 832 618 624 bytes, brute must use trial and error for every single of those bytes starting from 1 to file size, brute checks about 200000 bytes per second on my cpu, I dont think that is slow.

Mine was only a hypothesis and a request on a product that I do not know, I can not know with what structure and concept compresses a file, we are talking about "Fast Brute" and therefore hypothesized the possibility to make it even more faster.
I like to be informed about things, especially on issues that interest me, sorry for the chatter.
P.So not use the noun dude, it's unpleasant.