[darcs-users] Re: What's better, Darcs or Mercurial?

[Lele Gaifax]

Radoslaw Szkodzinski wrote:
> - Darcs stores binary files more efficiently I think.

It may depend on your interpretation of "efficiency", but I would not 
say that. Darcs binaries patches loose most of the beauty that happens 
with textual patches: this is because darcs doesn't use deltas to store 
revisions of that kind of files, but rather those patches contain both 
the old and the new content of the file, hexified and finally gzipped, 
so that's hardly efficient if weighted in bytes, and surely does not 
help in its handling, too.

So, except for rarely changed binaries, I would not recommend using 
darcs for them.

hth, ciao, lele.