On Wed, 4 May 2016 at 13:30 Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 04/05/16 16:37, Hendrik Leppkes wrote: > > If the long function returns (u)int64 and can read up to 64-bits > > without any trouble, then its equally clear to me. The only problem > > get_bits had that it was only reliable up to 23 bits or so, which was > > not quite clear and something you had to know. > > > > It can read up to 63 bits sadly ^^; > > That said, if you (Hendrik, Vittorio, Kieran) _really_ cannot stand _32 > for the function returning unsigned, that could be dropped, for the 63 > bits one I'd rather keep _63 instead of having "_long" as naming. > > The functions would then be > > unsigned int bitstream_read() > > uint64_t bitstream_read_63() > > unsigned int bitstream_peek() > > uint64_t bitstream_peek_63() > > int bitstream_read_signed() > > Would that be an acceptable compromise? > > No, it would be inconsistent which is even worse. Kieran _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
