On 08/19/2013 03:17 PM, Martin Storsjö wrote: > On Mon, 19 Aug 2013, Luca Barbato wrote: > >> On 19/08/13 22:24, John Stebbins wrote: >>> Do you mean add a field to MOVTrack that flags the need for 64 bit >>> offsets and then update this field whenever a packet is written? If >>> this is what you mean, then there are additional places where code to >>> update this field would have to be added (mov_flush_fragment and >>> compute_moov_size where data_offset is updated).Having this logic in >>> one place seemed simpler. >> It is used only in one place so the overhead is just a pointless loop >> afterall. > I don't really mind doing it like this, it makes the check very much > self-contained instead of spreading the logic all over the file. > > Wouldn't it be enough to just check the last packet? They should be > ordered in the same order in the arrays as in the file, so the last packet > should be the one that's furthest into the file, right? Not that it > matters much anyway - we iterate the same array multiple times anyway > while writing the moov atom. > >
I think you are correct. I can make this change if you would like. -- John GnuPG fingerprint: D0EC B3DB C372 D1F1 0B01 83F0 49F1 D7B2 60D4 D0F7
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
