Hi, On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:49:20PM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:37:30AM -0700, Luca Barbato wrote: >> >> On 10/04/12 09:24, Diego Biurrun wrote: >> >> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 07:30:30AM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 02:08:22AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote: >> >> >>>> --- >> >> >>>> libavcodec/Makefile | 2 +- >> >> >>>> libavcodec/h264.c | 358 >> >> >>>> +++----------------------------------------------- >> >> >>>> libavcodec/h264.h | 5 + >> >> >>>> libavcodec/h264dec.c | 349 >> >> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> >>>> 4 files changed, 375 insertions(+), 339 deletions(-) >> >> >>>> create mode 100644 libavcodec/h264dec.c >> >> >>> >> >> >>> ping >> >> >> >> >> >> You told me on IRC it did not significantly decrease compile time, so >> >> >> I don't see the point of the patch. >> >> > >> >> > That's not the only reason I went for implementing this patch. It also >> >> > reduces the size of h264.c by 350 lines, which is not huge, but more >> >> > than nothing, and it reduces the size of libavcodec if the H.264 decoder >> >> > is disabled but some other part that requires h264.c is enabled. >> >> >> >> Good point, if it doesn't break anything and doesn't hinder people >> >> working on h264.c seems a good patch. >> > >> > Size difference before and after while configuring with >> > "--disable-everything --enable-decoder=svq3": >> > >> > before: >> > biurrun@passion:~/src/priv/libav $ ls -l libavcodec/libavcodec.a >> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 biurrun src-pisa 33880296 2012-04-10 20:47 >> > libavcodec/libavcodec.a >> > >> > after: >> > -rw-rw-r-- 1 biurrun src-pisa 33852434 2012-04-10 21:36 >> > libavcodec/libavcodec.a >> > >> > This amounts to a saving of 32kB. >> >> I still don't think the split makes sense. Please re-read my earlier comment. > > There is no earlier comment to re-read, you only mentioned the effect of > this patch on compile time. Since some miscommunication seems to be > going on, let me quickly reiterate the goals of this patch: > > 1) Reduce line count of h264.c, > 2) reduce compile time of h264.c and > 3) reduce libavcodec size in certain configurations. > > Unfortunately the split did not quite have the effect on 2) that I > had hoped for, but there are modest improvements in 1) and 3). > > Could you please quickly state why you think this patch is not worth > the improvements in 1) and 3)?
I wonder how you think the patch manages to accomplish (3), given that it doesn't add or remove code? Sorry to sound like an asshole, but I'm a bit sceptical over this claim. Ronald _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
