Hi,

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 14/10/13 15:54, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 11:55 PM, Luca Barbato <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> -static av_noinline void emulated_edge_mc_sse(uint8_t *buf, const
> uint8_t
> >> *src,
> >> -                                             ptrdiff_t linesize,
> >> +static av_noinline void emulated_edge_mc_sse(uint8_t * buf,const
> uint8_t
> >> *src,
> >> +                                             ptrdiff_t buf_stride,
> >> +                                             ptrdiff_t src_stride,
> >>                                               int block_w, int block_h,
> >>                                               int src_x, int src_y, int
> w,
> >> int h)
> >>
> >
> > I don't believe my original patch had this argument ordering. Why did you
> > change it?
> >
>
> Because Kostya liked it better and matches the other functions in dsputil.
>

Shouldn't my opinion - as author of this code - matter a little? I prefer
that all silly forks keep code identical where it makes sense. That makes
my hobbyist life a lot easier.

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

Reply via email to