From: james.harris.1@nospicedham.gmail.com   
      
   On 19/07/2017 09:01, wolfgang kern wrote:   
   > James Harris asked:   
   >   
   >>>>>> How short was the (current) shortest solution?   
   > ...   
   >> On the size, has anyone looked at writing a normal base64 decoder,   
   >> encoding it in a form which is easy to decode, and decoding it first.   
   >> By that I mean that at present I gather the source "text" will have   
   >> the following   
   >>      
   >   
   > Of course we have to write a working decoder before and then encode it   
   > either by an 2:1 algo, that's what Terje and Kerr use, or what I   
   > use is encode only the bytes out of range to be modified by SMC.   
   > So my shortest decoder was 54 byte, but made it 59 for lesser SMC needs.   
      
   Do you mean the smallest base64 decoders in the above were about 54   
   bytes long, stored in textual form about 108 bytes long, and being   
   decoded 2 to 1?   
      
   > Kerr wrote the yet shortest with only 44 byte and I adopted it for SMC   
   > it came down to total 180 (+29 for base64 encoded Hello world test code).   
      
   You mentioned before that you had got down to 209 but it sounds from the   
   above as though you had reduced it to 180 - with the other 29 being test   
   data. I would call that a 180-byte solution!   
      
      
   --   
   James Harris   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)