search for: g72x

...s sessions in any mix of supported codecs(incl. G.723.1 and G729..). I whish that I had the time to make the 'glue logic' thats needed to connect the * codes api with Mapletree busmastering codecs channels. P.S. I am NOT a Mapletree salesperson. -The makers of hardphones prolly get their G72x licensing by using a DSP -that already has a license. The DSP can't be that expensive. I wish -someone would make a PCI card with something like 8 of these chips on it -and sell it cheap. Should be pretty easy to build a codec for Asterisk -that uses the DSP card. -On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 09:...

...-g729-g723.1/doc-svn8.txt) relates to Intel IPP 4.2, I thought I should try something else. I bumped into this : http://groups.google.com/group/asterisk-g729/feed/rss_v2_0_msgs.xml?num=50 which mentions this: http://asterisk.hosting.lv/ There I downloaded http://asterisk.hosting.lv/src/asterisk-g72x-1.0-beta5.tar.bz2 1. Using build.sh I'm editing, as suggested in README, build.sh file. My problem is I don't fully understand the values I must change. What does this inc value stands for ? Now, it is valued to : inc=/home/arkadi/opt/asterisk-1.4/include 2. Using configure, make, make...

...r guards (results in errors). > > kiss_fft could probably use some include guards. Other than that, if you want to > do things like include all .c in the same file, just #undef the what you need. > Well, that's exactly what I did. What about all these patents that cover amr and g72X codecs. Are there many of them? Since speex doesn't use these algorithms (like acelp) does it mean that it's inferior to amr for example?

I'm just curious, who and why came up with that strange way to write includes: #ifdef _BUILD_SPEEX # include "speex_types.h" #else # include <speex/speex_types.h> #endif I personally consider it a bug. If I use speex then obviously I should not have _BUILD_SPEEX defined. The broken behavior happens in this simple scenario: 1) I check out latest git version to ./src/speex 2)

Hi Stepan, Sorry for the delay. It's great that you are working on MergeFunctions as well and I agree, we should definitely try to combine our efforts to improve MergeFunctions. Just to give you some context, the pass (with the similar function merging patch) is already being used in a production setting. From my point of view, it would be better if we focus on improving its capability

...0.03 300379 1 0.04 275083 function_try_block.ll 7 23756 0 0.01 23737 0 0.01 23737 functs.ll 5 64545 0 0.01 64517 0 0.02 64517 g711.ll 7 16305 0 0.01 16269 0 0.01 16269 g721.ll 2 17014 0 0.01 16978 0 0.01 16978 g723_24.ll 2 16931 0 0.01 16895 0 0.01 16895 g723_40.ll 2 17754 0 0.01 17718 0 0.01 17718 g72x.ll 11 88468 0 0.01 88432 0 0.02 88432 Galign11.ll 5 85622 0 0.01 85607 0 0.01 85607 garage.ll 25 32013 0 0.01 31982 0 0.01 31982 gasp.ll 6 51262 0 0.01 51232 0 0.01 51232 gcc-loops.ll 99 215027 3 0.02 214260 3 0.03 214260 gdevmem.ll 27 181881 0 0.02 181857 0 0.03 179175 gdevs.ll 1 1879 0 0.01 1855...