Subject: Re: base85: Two tiny fixes

From: Andreas Gruenbacher <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2010 14:02:02 +0100

On Thursday 07 January 2010 18:58:01 Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> ACK.  Please post them to this list.

Okay, done.

> On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> > There is another little oddity in the way the de85 table is set up: 0 
> > indicates an invalid entry; to avoid this from clashing with a valid entry, 
> > valid entries are incremented by one and decremented again while decoding.  
> > This leads to slightly worse code than using a negative number to indicate 
> > invalid values (and avoiding to increment/decrement).
> 
> You can make a patch to modify that as well if you wish.

Nah, it's not worth the noise.

> And in that case don't forget to make de85 explicitly signed as a char is
> unsigned by default on some platforms.

I would have forgotten this; thanks for pointing it out!

Thanks,
Andreas