And here we go:

On 17 Jan 2012, at 19:37, Stefan Marr wrote:
> After fixing that, I get these numbers:
> #(102851 10781 10798 9511 10335 9883)
> Not really impressive.
>
> I did not immediately see how to avoid the compression.

> The image size goes currently up by ca. 50%, from 22MB to 31MB.

#(76700 1787 1793 1768 1741 1748)

That is space for performance: image size is at 39MB.





Not that my version with an extra dictionary is still faster by about 20% (1.4s vs. 1.7s) since it avoids the decoding from the compiled method.

Is there any general use for such an embedding,
beside making the finder usable?

Best regards
Stefan

--
Stefan Marr
Software Languages Lab
Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Pleinlaan 2 / B-1050 Brussels / Belgium
http://soft.vub.ac.be/~smarr
Phone: +32 2 629 2974
Fax: � +32 2 629 3525