Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "004303".
Did you mean:
0.04303
2014 Jun 30
2
Residual bps and encoding speed
...permail/flac-dev/2014-June/004771.html
(this patch also adds 4 to subframe_bps, but in different place).
So I think it's a matter of taste which patch to prefer: this --
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2014-June/004771.html
or this --
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2013-July/004303.html
2014 Jun 30
2
[PATCH] stream_encoder : Improve selection of residual accumulator width
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 03:27:18AM +0400, lvqcl wrote:
> lvqcl wrote:
> > FLAC 1.2.1 and 1.3.0 cannot encode snippet6.wav with -7 and -8 encoding modes.
> > But they are able to do this with --disable-fixed-subframes option. This
> > implies that snippet6.wav triggers a problem somewthere inside
> > FLAC__fixed_compute_residual(data[], data_len, order, residual[])
2014 Jul 02
0
Residual bps and encoding speed
...771.html
> (this patch also adds 4 to subframe_bps, but in different place).
>
> So I think it's a matter of taste which patch to prefer: this --
> http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2014-June/004771.html
> or this --
> http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac-dev/2013-July/004303.html
I much prefer the second version because its such a trivial patch.
Howver, exactly because it is such a trivial patch it would be
easy for someone to remove the "+ 4" again and break it.
Before I commit this, I'd like to have a test that triggers this
problem. Let me work on t...