On 06/05/2011 05:00 PM, Stefano Sabatini wrote: > On date Sunday 2011-06-05 22:28:22 +0200, Stefano Sabatini encoded: >> On date Sunday 2011-03-13 17:27:24 -0400, Justin Ruggles wrote: >>> On 03/13/2011 05:24 PM, Alex Converse wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Justin Ruggles >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On 03/13/2011 04:59 PM, Stefano Sabatini wrote: >> [...] >>>>>> The second one, av_get_bits_per_sample_fmt(), is misnamed (should be >>>>>> av_get_bits_per_sample()), so we may change the name to >>>>>> av_get_bits_per_sample2() for avoiding the conflict with the name >>>>>> already taken. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I agree. But as long as we're reworking it, why not >>>>> av_get_bytes_per_sample() so it doesn't have to be divided by 8 >>>>> everywhere? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Don't some ADPCM codecs have less than 8 bits per sample. >> > >> First variant attached, if we have no reasons to in the future we >> won't add some sample format with a non integer number of bytes then >> I'll post the av_get_bytes_per_sample() variant. > > In case the sense of the text above was not clear, I meant: do you > have some reason to suppose that we may add a sample format with a non > integer number of bytes?
no. > If this is not the case, I suppose it is safe to just use > av_get_bytes_per_sample(). I think it should be av_get_sample_fmt_bytes() to match the other functions. av_get_bits_per_sample() is something completely different having to do with the codec, unrelated to the sample format. It's mostly just a convenience function for libavformat. -Justin _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
