Programmer Humor

32479 readers

277 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

693

New File Format (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

83 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (13 children)

Smh at least use 7z

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (12 children)

zstd or leave

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (6 children)

zstd may be newer and faster but lzma still compresses more

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Thought I'd check on the Linux source tree tar. zstd -19 vs lzma -9:

❯ ls -lh
total 1,6G
-rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 1,4G Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar
-rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 128M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.lzma
-rw-r--r-- 1 pmo pmo 138M Sep 13 22:16 linux-6.6-rc1.tar.zst

About +8% compared to lzma. Decompression time though:

zstd -d -k -T0 *.zst  0,68s user 0,46s system 162% cpu 0,700 total
lzma -d -k -T0 *.lzma  4,75s user 0,51s system 99% cpu 5,274 total

Yeah, I'm going with zstd all the way.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Nice data. Thanks for reminding me why I prefer zstd

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

damn I did not know zstd was that good. Never thought I'd hear myself say this unironically but thanks Facebook

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

*Thank you engineers who happen to be working at Facebook

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Very true, good point

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)