Caleb Sander

But it does save memory, as you don't need any space besides the source and destination ints

I found it was possible to slightly improve performance by using string concatenation of the encoded chunks, but using string concatenation in `encodeChunk()` led to significant performance decreases: ``` join()...

Sure. Here is the output from running `node bench/bench.js` on the upstream master (08a344d): ``` base64.toByteArray() (decode) x 320 ops/sec ±0.77% (88 runs sampled) base64.fromByteArray() (encode) x 60.11 ops/sec ±0.90%...

> Why not use [`Array.prototype.at(-1)`](https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/at) ? That method didn't exist in the ECMAScript spec 4 years ago, but looks like it solves the issue pointed out above.

> It seems like Valgrind doesn't really understand musl's malloc. It fails to detect the memory leak in a trivial program. > > ``` > $ cat test.c > #include...

I think I may have fixed the weird multiplying results with Pull Request #5. At least the first few examples in the original comment work now.

My branch (see #5) fixes your issue. I don't believe this repository is being maintained any longer.

@rustbot label +T-libs-api -T-libs

ACP: https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/196

@rustbot label +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-author