@qntm FYI, we're building base-32768 into the JavaScript standard's tooling (to auto-ID every algo step, as short as possible).
-
(Given that the spec is huge and nearly all ASCII, using utf16 would be kinda dumb.)
Then is there any particular reason for not using Base65536? It would yield shorter markers.
-
-
Only in the limit. We want more than a 6x margin, just in case, so we'd need 2 chars anyway. Also: much less font support.
-
Two other comments: (1) Base32768 uses CJK characters which may *not* look like gibberish to CJK readers, particularly in short strings
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.