search for: looker

Version 1.2.1 of the standard/spec or the local implementation? I've not seen "FLAC 1.0/1.1 Compliant" or "FLAC 1.2 Compliant" on the specs of hardware gear for example when FLAC is stated supported. Just a curious on-looker. On 7 February 2011 02:34, Pierre-Yves Thoulon <py.thoulon at gmail.com> wrote: > Version 1.2.1 introduced new rice coding techniques that are used by > the reference encoder for 24 bit files. An older version of the > decoder will have trouble with frames that use this encoding.....

...24, Nicholas Bower wrote: > Version 1.2.1 of the standard/spec or the local implementation? > > I've not seen "FLAC 1.0/1.1 Compliant" or "FLAC 1.2 Compliant" on > the specs of hardware gear for example when FLAC is stated supported. > > Just a curious on-looker. > > > On 7 February 2011 02:34, Pierre-Yves Thoulon > <py.thoulon at gmail.com> wrote: >> Version 1.2.1 introduced new rice coding techniques that are used by >> the reference encoder for 24 bit files. An older version of the >> decoder will have trouble with...

Thanks for bringing up this aspect, Nicholas. I seem to recall that specific hardware has a problem with certain compression levels, but I cannot recall whether that was limited to just encoding, or decoding as well. It could very well be true that I am conflating my vague memory of encoder limitations with decoder limitations. It does seem to be that the oppo BDP-95 is exhibiting

Well now that I got your attention.... Why RoR sucks: 1. It''s smarter than me. Just when I think I''ll have to do some mundane thing (like I use to in PHP or ASP), I find out RoR does it already for me. 2. It takes about half or less code to put my stuff together in RoR than it did in PHP, ASP, ASP.NET, etc. It seems so unnatural that I can have a method with only 4 lines