"Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> writes:

> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Alex Converse <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>> 2011/11/17 Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>:
>>> Alex Converse <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>>>> From: Thierry Foucu <[email protected]>
>>>>
>>>> Found with Address Sanitizer
>>>> ---
>>>>  libavcodec/vp6.c |    8 +++++---
>>>>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/libavcodec/vp6.c b/libavcodec/vp6.c
>>>> index 03024fa..b594003 100644
>>>> --- a/libavcodec/vp6.c
>>>> +++ b/libavcodec/vp6.c
>>>> @@ -442,7 +442,7 @@ static void vp6_parse_coeff(VP56Context *s)
>>>>          model1 = model->coeff_dccv[pt];
>>>>          model2 = model->coeff_dcct[pt][ctx];
>>>>
>>>> -        for (coeff_idx=0; coeff_idx<64; ) {
>>>> +        for (coeff_idx=0;;) {
>>>
>>> This looks a bit unusual.
>>>
>>
>> If you mean stylistically I'm happy to split out the initial assignment.
>
> I'm pretty sure he meant stylistically. A for loop with only an
> initializer is ... unusual. :-).

Yes, that's what I meant.  Functionally, the patch looks fine, as I
already said.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to