search for: exc2buf

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "exc2buf".

Did you mean: exbuf
2005 Feb 28
2
memory usage
hi, jean-marc: i think we can remove spx_sig_t *orig. but am not sure about exc2Buf. is it for extension? rgds, tk On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:42:38 -0500, Jean-Marc Valin <Jean-Marc.Valin@usherbrooke.ca> wrote: > Hi, > > I looked at the code I think there are still places where you can reduce > memory. For example, I think bufSize can be reduced to around 400 &g...
2005 Feb 28
4
memory usage
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 19:42 -0500, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > > jean-marc: i think we can remove spx_sig_t *orig. > > but am not sure about exc2Buf. is it for extension? > > orig is already removed in SVN (which you should probably use). As for > exc2, it can be removed, but I'm not sure if you can just use exc > instead (maybe yes). > when removing "spx_sig_t *orig;" in the encoder, the stack usage went from 170...
2005 Mar 01
0
memory usage
Alfred E. Heggestad wrote: >On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 19:42 -0500, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > > >>>jean-marc: i think we can remove spx_sig_t *orig. >>>but am not sure about exc2Buf. is it for extension? >>> >>> >>orig is already removed in SVN (which you should probably use). As for >>exc2, it can be removed, but I'm not sure if you can just use exc >>instead (maybe yes). >> >> >> >when removing "spx_...
2005 Feb 27
2
memory usage
hi Alfred, >I am currently trying to port speex v1.1.6 to a microcontroller with >very limited memory (<64Kbyte RAM). if forced to the wall, you can try below (need to "rewrite" the code a little): unless i am very much mistaken, you can do "dynamic allocation" for some of the memory. these memories are only required when you are running eg speex_encode for the