On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 08:06:54PM +0200, Reimar Döffinger wrote: > On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 07:09:13PM +0200, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 04:48:43PM +0200, Reimar Döffinger wrote: > > > @@ -549,11 +549,8 @@ retry: > > > av_log(s->avctx, AV_LOG_ERROR, "run overflow at %dx%d > > > i:%d\n", s->mb_x, s->mb_y, s->mb_intra); > > > return -1; > > > } > > > - j = scan_table[i]; > > > + j = scan_table[i-1]; > > > > the - 1 feels avoidable > > I have no good idea how so far.
cant i be offset at entry & exit of the loop ? or scan_table be offset by -1 ? anyway not really important, its faster as is than before so this is maybe better in a seperate later patch > Note that it is not really an extra cost: we save on a i++ at this place > exchange... > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible. -- Voltaire
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
