Re: There are smaller ways to encode a CRC32 table...

[Ian Campbell <ijc@hellion.org.uk>]

On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 23:53 -0500, George Spelvin wrote:
> The code to fill it in is smaller than the table itself.
> Is it worth complicating things with some INIT code to reduce
> the stored image size?  (The table is not compressible.)
[snip]

Thanks but since the code is only used when building the image I'm not
too worried which way is used and I've tested the table based one ;-).

> And BTW, storing the inverse of the CRC only catches trailing (after the CRC)
> all-zero padding.  If this is not a problem, it's not necessary, although you
> still might want to do it just for consistency.  This inversion changes the
> CRC of the entire image (body + CRC) from all-zero to a fixed non-zero value.
> (To be precise, to the (non-inverted) CRC of 0xffffffff.)

I didn't know the precise details of why you might invert it, thanks for
the info.

Ian
-- 
Ian Campbell
Current Noise: Reverend Bizarre - Sodoma Sunrise

I am a man: nothing human is alien to me.
		-- Publius Terentius Afer (Terence)