Re: [rfa] Clarify remote protocol RLE example

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu dot org>]

> Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2007 00:06:58 +0200
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> CC: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de,         jimb@codesourcery.com
> 
> > Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2007 15:18:22 -0400
> > From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org, ukleinek@informatik.uni-freiburg.de,
> > 	Jim Blandy <jimb@codesourcery.com>
> > 
> > On Sat, Nov 03, 2007 at 09:01:21PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > >  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.
> > 
> > How about "with an initial character, the character @samp{*}, and a
> > repeat count"?  With that, I quite like your version.
> 
> How about
> 
>  Run-length encoding replaces runs of identical characters with a
>  @samp{*} followed by a repeat count.
> 
> ?

Sorry, I now realize that I misunderstood the reason why you used the
"initial character".  You meant the repeated character itself, right?

Then how about this variant:

  Run-length encoding replaces runs of identical characters with one
  instance of the repeated character, followed by a @samp{*} and a
  repeat count.