fbk-qr...@zacglen.net writes: >>fbk-qr...@zacglen.net writes: >> >>> Further to my previous "silence" patch I have discovered >>> that there is another error involving the rms calculations. >>> >>> Initially, and after a reset, the rms sample window is empty >>> yet the rms calculation always uses the window size as >>> the calculation denominator. This will make the rms >>> value appear artificially low to start with. Instead, an >>> actual count of samples should be used. >>> >>> Incidentally, I think that the hard-coded 1/50 for selection >>> of a window size should also be parametized. Sometimes a size using >>> 1/20 (100 milliseconds when stereo) can be more appropriate than the >>> very small 40 millisecond hard-coded sample window size. >>> >>> The following is the updated patch: >> >>I'm certainly not going to take a patch with several unrelated changes >>as is, nor am I going to do the work unravelling what's what. >> >>-- >>Mns Rullgrd >> > > Perhaps that is why there are still so many blatant bugs in sox > after all of these years? > > I have only started looking and I am sure I can find many > many more. > > It is entirely up to you. I feed information into your brain > and if your brain is incapable or unwilling to digest any of it > then that is entirely your problem. > > Please bear in mind that sox currently contains hundred of > related and unrelated lines of code. And that doesn't stop > sox from working does it? Unrelatedness has never been > an obstacle in the past has it? > > Anyhow would you care to introduce yourself and explain how > it is that you have apparently become the sole arbiter of what > is good or bad for sox. > > Incidentally, I can very easily patch sox entirely for my own > benefit and there is no compulsion for me to publish such > private changes on any public forum. I only do that out of > the goodness of my heart. The patches merely serve as a convenient > way of explaining the bugs in more detail. Once a person such as > your kind self has availed him- or her-self of the wisdom of my discoveries > then your good person is freely available to work very hard at finding > some good reason to cast aspersions upon my discoveries. But I would > submit that the easier path would be to take my discoveries on board > and make good use of what has cost me in time and effort, at no > cost to yourself.
If that's the attitude you're going to display, I will have to ask you to kindly go away until such time as you are able to engage in a polite conversation. Perhaps you could use that time to study good software development practices. -- Måns Rullgård _______________________________________________ SoX-devel mailing list SoX-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sox-devel
