Hi,

2012/3/1 Måns Rullgård <[email protected]>:
> Kostya Shishkov <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 08:32:06AM -0800, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Ronald S. Bultje <[email protected]> 
>>> wrote:
>>> > On 64bit platforms with 32bit int, this means we won't have to sign-
>>> > extend the integer anymore.
>>> > ---
>>> >  libavcodec/arm/vp8dsp_init_arm.c |   32 ++++----
>>> >  libavcodec/ppc/vp8dsp_altivec.c  |   16 ++--
>>> >  libavcodec/vp8dsp.c              |   44 +++++-----
>>> >  libavcodec/vp8dsp.h              |   38 +++++-----
>>> >  libavcodec/x86/vp8dsp-init.c     |  158 
>>> > +++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>>> >  5 files changed, 144 insertions(+), 144 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> Ping.
>>
>> is it still intptr?
>
> I still think these should be ptrdiff_t.

See old thread, some people object to intptr_t and others object to
ptrdiff_t, for orthogonal reasons. Someone had to make a decision,
that person was me, and it is intptr_t. This is consistent with what
x264 does and thus probably a good long-term idea anyway. (Also please
note that they're really always the same, so we're talking pure theory
bs here.)

Also note that me forcing that earlier patch through fixed a real bug
(rv40 failing on Win64), since int was not sign/zero-extended, thus
causing a fail when reading as a function argument from stack (which
happens on Win64).

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

Reply via email to