Hi,

On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Ronald S. Bultje <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Måns Rullgård <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> writes:
>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Måns Rullgård <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> "Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> writes:
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Måns Rullgård <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> inline_mmx_deps="inline_asm mmx"
>>>>>> inline_sse_deps="inline_mmx"
>>>>>
>>>>> If the user uses --disable-sse, this doesn't disable it here. I
>>>>> suppose you might mean inline_sse_deps="inline_mmx sse"?
>>>>
>>>> Right.
>>>>
>>>>> Other than that, looks good to me. I don't think we need HAVE_SSE etc.
>>>>> in config.h, only HAVE_INLINE_SSE and HAVE_YASM_SSE.
>>>>
>>>> Some of them are needed.  For instance, we need to know if any kind of
>>>> mmx might be used in order to issue emms correctly.
>>>
>>> Hm, ok, so I guess we can keep HAVE_MMX. Do we need others?
>>
>> Do they do any harm?
>
> Just trying to keep it clean.
>
> As for vsnprintf behaviour, from MSDN:
> "vsnprintf, _vsnprintf, and _vsnwprintf return the number of
> characters written if the number of characters to write is less than
> or equal to count; if the number of characters to write is greater
> than count, these functions return -1 indicating that output has been
> truncated. The return value does not include the terminating null, if
> one is written."
>
> So if format, buffer != NULL and count > 0, a return value of -1 means
> that the buffer was overrun and is filled with data ("truncated"), so
> writing a '\0' at the end and returning count should be OK then.
>
> As you pointed out, if the return value equals count, no zero was
> written and we should add that.
>
> Do we care that the return value of this snprintf() drop-in will not
> be the amount of characters that would have been written, but is
> simply count, if the output was truncated? If so, this should be
> relatively easy to finish.

Wrong thread, ignore.

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

Reply via email to