On 04/12/2011 2:03 PM, Kostya Shishkov wrote:
It's better to amend the entry with ProRes decoder (also notice the
capitalisation) IMO.

All right.

For the record I find it hard to believe it's a real name and not a pseudonym.
Actually I sent a letter to the author asking about it (got no reply though).

Ir most probably is a pseudonym, but I do not think that should
stop Libav from having it. A ProRes encoder is something that's
-very- beneficial, IMO.


this can be shared between decoder and encoder

Okay.

makes me wonder where those matrices come from

Well it IS a reverse engineered codec...

val ? (val<<  1) + sign : 0

Okay.

also those macros are mostly used in exactly one place, aren't they?

Yeah. I figured they might be there solely for clarity, or perhaps
future use, once support for more colorspaces is added.

this should also be shared with decoder

Yup.

undescriptive function name and I suspect we can replace it with DSPutil
anyway

All right. I'll check into this before I send a v2.

see above

Ditto.

not enough arguments passed IMO

One can never have too many arguments, clearly. ;)

I doubt it's really needed.

Which bit are you referring to with this?

s/unsafe/partial/

Okay.

and just a matter of taste but this code looks ugly to me

It is, which is why I elected to leave it the same as it was originally.

it's described in MultimediaWiki, these magic numbers should be all commented

Will do.

I'll wait until I get the go-ahead from everyone before submitting a v2.

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

Reply via email to