search for: subframe_mem

thanks for all your feedback. here's the revised patch: On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:20 PM Timothy B. Terriberry <tterribe at xiph.org> wrote: > Jean-Marc Valin wrote: > > I think you'll want something like: > > (opus_int16)((unsigned)demixing_matrix[2*i+1] << 8) > > (though you might want to check it too) > > FWIW, we use the construct > int s =

...d patch. On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 5:48 PM Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin at jmvalin.ca> wrote: > Hi Drew, > > I've had some time to dig more deeply into your patch. Here's some more > in-depth comments: > > 1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in private.h adds a > subframe_mem[] that's not in opus_multistream_encoder.c. I assume it's > due to a merge problem (that field was removed some time ago), but can > you confirm/fix the issue? > Done. Yes, this is a merge conflict. > > 2) I noticed your patch adds many OPUS_EXPORT declarations. OPUS_EXPORT...

...jmvalin.ca>> wrote: > > > > Hi Drew, > > > > I've had some time to dig more deeply into your patch. Here's some > more > > in-depth comments: > > > > 1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in private.h adds a > > subframe_mem[] that's not in opus_multistream_encoder.c. I assume > it's > > due to a merge problem (that field was removed some time ago), but > can > > you confirm/fix the issue? > > > > Done. Yes, this is a merge conflict. > > > > > > 2) I n...

Hi Drew, I've had some time to dig more deeply into your patch. Here's some more in-depth comments: 1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in private.h adds a subframe_mem[] that's not in opus_multistream_encoder.c. I assume it's due to a merge problem (that field was removed some time ago), but can you confirm/fix the issue? 2) I noticed your patch adds many OPUS_EXPORT declarations. OPUS_EXPORT is only meant for functions exposed to the API (and in the inc...

...at jmvalin.ca > <mailto:jmvalin at jmvalin.ca>> wrote: > > Hi Drew, > > I've had some time to dig more deeply into your patch. Here's some more > in-depth comments: > > 1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in private.h adds a > subframe_mem[] that's not in opus_multistream_encoder.c. I assume it's > due to a merge problem (that field was removed some time ago), but can > you confirm/fix the issue? > > Done. Yes, this is a merge conflict.  > > > 2) I noticed your patch adds many OPUS_EXPORT d...

...g more deeply into your > patch. Here's > >     some more > >     >     in-depth comments: > >     > > >     >     1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in > private.h adds a > >     >     subframe_mem[] that's not in > opus_multistream_encoder.c. I > >     assume it's > >     >     due to a merge problem (that field was removed some > time ago), > >     but can > >     >     you confirm/fix the issue? &gt...

...; > > > > in-depth comments: > > > > > > > > > > 1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in > > > private.h adds a > > > > > subframe_mem[] that's not in > > > opus_multistream_encoder.c. I > > > > assume it's > > > > > due to a merge problem (that field was > > removed some > > > time ago), &...

...   >     some more > >         >     >     in-depth comments: > >         >     > > >         >     >     1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct in > >         private.h adds a > >         >     >     subframe_mem[] that's not in > >         opus_multistream_encoder.c. I > >         >     assume it's > >         >     >     due to a merge problem (that field was > removed some > >         time ago), > >         ...

...> > in-depth comments: >> > > > > >> > > > > 1) I note that your OpusMSEncoder struct >> in >> > > private.h adds a >> > > > > subframe_mem[] that's not in >> > > opus_multistream_encoder.c. I >> > > > assume it's >> > > > > due to a merge problem (that field was >> > removed some >> > >...

... in-depth comments: > >         >         >     > > >         >         >     >     1) I note that your > OpusMSEncoder struct in > >         >         private.h adds a > >         >         >     >     subframe_mem[] that's not in > >         >         opus_multistream_encoder.c. I > >         >         >     assume it's > >         >         >     >     due to a merge problem (that > field was > >         removed som...