Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > Adding the extra bits to bps in evaluate_fixed_subframe_ instead of > precompute_partition_info_sums_ is ok with me, that's what I suggested > in the original thread discussing this problem,
found it: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2013-July/004303.html > but I think it should > be done also in the lpc function. Adding order instead of 4 might work > for fixed frames, for LPC it looks too pessimistic. I'm OK with any version. > To me it looks like (order * subframe_bps) in the calculation is the > number of bits for the warmup samples in the fixed subframe. Thanks! _______________________________________________ flac-dev mailing list flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
