I had several hundred .png files that I wanted to optimize. I setup
benchmarks comparing pngcrush compression to using Go's standard library
image/png to decode/encode the images. Overall, pngcrush was only 1.5%
more efficient at optimizing the result file size but pngcrush took 3X as
long to process the files.
Overall, I was very impressed with Go's image/png support and efficiency
and I wanted to say "thank you" to all of the people who helped make this
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.