Ridley Combs (12023-02-21):
> Fair enough, if we're fine with breaking the existing case further.
> Should I simply drop rectangles after a first, or return an error?
You have to ask? Between reporting an error and silently corrupting
data, the answer is never in doubt.
> This is only true for
> On Feb 21, 2023, at 01:48, Nicolas George wrote:
>
> rcombs (12023-02-20):
>> This already gave garbled output when multiple rects were present,
>> so this is simply documenting an existing requirement.
>> ---
>> libavcodec/assenc.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> NAK: the
rcombs (12023-02-20):
> This already gave garbled output when multiple rects were present,
> so this is simply documenting an existing requirement.
> ---
> libavcodec/assenc.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
NAK: the code has provisions for multiple rectangles, if you enforce a
single
This already gave garbled output when multiple rects were present,
so this is simply documenting an existing requirement.
---
libavcodec/assenc.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavcodec/assenc.c b/libavcodec/assenc.c
index db6fd25dd7..1c49a6685b 100644
---
