On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote: > On 06/23/2013 06:56 PM, Diego Biurrun wrote: >> I settled for jpeg2000 when I initially cleaned up the SoC code. >> There is no reason to undo that decision now, for absolutely no gain. > > The fact you picked something suboptimal by that time and I didn't > notice till today (that I cleaned up that set of patches) isn't a good > reason to keep things as they are, given I already worked to make them a > little better. > > The gain is that I already did it, nothing breaks and the code is more > readable. >
You're seriously bike-shedding about calling it jpeg2000 or jpeg2k now? Why would you ever do that? Its called jpeg2000 today, what good would renaming it ever do? How is jpeg2k more readable? Personally i think it looks ugly, because the official name is jpeg2000. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
