On Nov 11, 2008, at 3:44 PM, Steve Murphy wrote: > On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 16:11 -0700, Wilton Helm wrote: >> I'm a bit puzzled, also, having implemented ulaw and alaw in an >> embedded application. Each can be done with a 16 Kbyte table in >> about >> 0 time with no errors. There are probably tricks that will cut the >> table down by 2 or 4 X for a small cost in CPU cycles. The inverse >> requires 256 16 bit words. I thought ulaw and alaw were pretty much >> no brainers. I don't know of any gottchas. Why anyone with more >> that >> a few K bytes of total system memory would even consider anything >> other than a lookup table is beyond me. >> >> Wilton > > Wilton-- > > AFAIK, the current algorithms (old & new) are indeed table lookup. > It wouldn't hurt for you to do a code review on them, you might > be able to improve them...! > > murf
For those of you interested in a slightly longer discussion here, there is discussion (Nov 14) on the voip-users-conference about this and many other things: http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=22622&cmd=tc JT --- John Todd [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-256-428-6083 Asterisk Open Source Community Director _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
