On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Justin Ruggles
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 02/23/2012 01:56 PM, Alex Converse wrote:
>
>> TIFF v6.0 (unimplemented) adds signed equivalents.
>> ---
>>  libavcodec/tiff.c |   18 +++++++++---------
>>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/libavcodec/tiff.c b/libavcodec/tiff.c
>> index a88d0f9..51ebd69 100644
>> --- a/libavcodec/tiff.c
>> +++ b/libavcodec/tiff.c
>> @@ -59,24 +59,24 @@ typedef struct TiffContext {
>>      LZWState *lzw;
>>  } TiffContext;
>>
>> -static int tget_short(const uint8_t **p, int le){
>> -    int v = le ? AV_RL16(*p) : AV_RB16(*p);
>> +static unsigned tget_short(const uint8_t **p, int le) {
>> +    unsigned v = le ? AV_RL16(*p) : AV_RB16(*p);
>>      *p += 2;
>>      return v;
>>  }
>>
>> -static int tget_long(const uint8_t **p, int le){
>> -    int v = le ? AV_RL32(*p) : AV_RB32(*p);
>> +static unsigned tget_long(const uint8_t **p, int le) {
>> +    unsigned v = le ? AV_RL32(*p) : AV_RB32(*p);
>>      *p += 4;
>>      return v;
>>  }
>>
>> -static int tget(const uint8_t **p, int type, int le){
>> +static unsigned tget(const uint8_t **p, int type, int le) {
>>      switch(type){
>>      case TIFF_BYTE : return *(*p)++;
>>      case TIFF_SHORT: return tget_short(p, le);
>>      case TIFF_LONG : return tget_long (p, le);
>> -    default        : return -1;
>> +    default        : return UINT_MAX;
>>      }
>>  }
>
>
> I know it's quite unlikely, but UINT_MAX is a valid value. Maybe we
> should use int64_t as the return type and use INT64_MIN as the "unknown"
> value just for spec-correctness sake.
>

There is nor a single place where we check if tget() returns
UINT_MAX/-1 as a proxy for checking if it failed.

I'm pretty sure that line is just there to make sure the function
always returns a value.
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to