Re: [rfa] Clarify remote protocol RLE example

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 12:19:56 -0400
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de

Sorry for the previous unfinished message: hit SEND by mistake.

> Uwe pointed out that the example in the GDB manual for run-length
> encoding is a bit confusing.  It suggests that "0* " should expand
> to 000, but in fact it expands to 0000, because the initial zero
> is counted separately.
> 
> Is this version clearer?  OK to commit?

Well, I still needed to read the text 2 or 3 times before I understood
what it tries to say.

How about this version instead:

 Response @var{data} can be run-length encoded to save space.
 Run-length encoding replaces runs of identical characters with the
 character @samp{*} followed by a repeat count.  The repeat count is
 itself sent encoded, to avoid binary characters in @var{data}: a
 value of @var{n} is sent as @code{@var{n}+29}.  For a repeat count
 greater or equal to 3, this produces a printable @sc{ascii}
 character, e.g.@: a space (@sc{ascii} code 32) for a repeat count of
 3.  (This is because run-length encoding starts to win for counts 3
 or more.)  Thus, for example, @samp{0* } is a run-length encoding of
 "0000": the space character after @samp{*} means repeat the leading
 @code{0} @w{@code{32 - 29 = 3}} more times.

>  The printable
>  characters @samp{$}, @samp{#}, @samp{+} and @samp{-} or with a numeric
>  value greater than 126 should not be used.

This part I simply don't understand.  What does it mean ``should not
be used''? what should be done instead? break the string into several
smaller ones?