search for: total_error_x

Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "total_error_x".

Did you mean: total_error_3
2004 Sep 10
2
Re: 0.9 problems
On Sat, May 19, 2001 at 06:42:22PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > I think this could be fixed by changing the (data_len > 0) test to be > (data_len > 0 && total_error_X > 0). Yes, this appears to have worked. I can now correctly encode and decode both my 8kHz/8-bit/mono sample, and a 44.1kHz/16-bit/stereo sample on Debian/alpha. Attached is a patch which combines this fix with my earlier patch. -- - mdz -------------- next part -------------- --- fixed.c.o...
2004 Sep 10
2
Re: 0.9 problems
Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> wrote: > 0.9. As I said, I was using an 8-bit sample, Ah, that didn't quite register with me. I'm using a CD-style 44.1kHz/stereo/16-bit test file. > to avoid dealing with endian issues in the file format. I don't > know whether any of those exist or not. I don't think so. 0.9 works fine on i386 (little) and sparc (big), and
2004 Sep 10
0
Re: 0.9 problems
...tion. Here's a small test program: #include <math.h> int main() { double foo = log((double)0); printf("%e\n", foo); printf("%e\n", foo / M_LN2); return 0; } I think this could be fixed by changing the (data_len > 0) test to be (data_len > 0 && total_error_X > 0). -- - mdz