Quote:
Originally Posted by vugtitan
Now my idea is why not have a separate dictionary for the primary dictionary which will specify the primary dictionary's dataset.because the primary dictionary is 10 times smaller then the secondary dictionary which describes how to uncompress the primary dictionary and the primary dictionary will expand the compressed file.Thus the secondary dictionary simply ONLY relates to the primary dictionary and how to create it.
thus you would have 2 separate files on compressing rar1 and rar2 and rar2 only relates to rar1 dictionary's creation and then rar1 will recreate original file.
by this method you could achieve nearly unlimited compression for not just text but video too.just imagine a dvd video file downloading in seconds.
could you people give me a critical analysis of any mistakes in the above above idea?
|
You realize you would still have to keep all those files, right ?
It does not matter whether you just compress the dictionary for the second pass, in order to retrieve the original file the first compressed file would still be required.
As Tiersten pointed out, if your method worked you could compress anything to one bit. So, I'll give you one bit: 1.
Now tell me: which book this one bit decompresses to ? Is it the Bible ? Is it the newest Stieg Larsson novel ? Is it a treatise on Information Theory ?
Don't you realize you can't get all that information from a single bit ?
Take a look at this:
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/compression...section-8.html