On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 11:34:26 +0300 Ivan Kalvachev <ikalvac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If I understand correctly, the root of the problem is the undefined behavior > of the compiler and the C standard. > Is there any chance that FFmpeg project could initiate a change in the > next C standard, so this thing would be defined? > (and I guess, also define a few other similar things, like signed > right shift, etc...) > > It is a matter of fact, that a lot of compiler-defined-things have > been implemented in > certain ways on most compilers and that there are plenty of programs > depend on these > specific implementations and break when a new compiler does things differently > (clang had nice article about it). > > > About the typedef, is SUINT a standard defined type for workarounding > this specific problem? > I do suspect that some of our fellow developers simply find its name ugly. > > Maybe they would be more welcoming if > "suint32_t" like typedef is used? This thing is brain dead - not even the post year 2000 C committee would accept it. _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
