[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] swscale-example: Remove hack to end loop by setting variables to break.

[Ramiro Polla]

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:10 PM, Michael Niedermayer<michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 09:43:09PM -0300, Ramiro Polla wrote:
>> $subj,
>>
>> This is part of a series of patches to make swscale-example actually
>> serve as an example. I intend to also do add a bunch of comments, do a
>> bunch of cosmetics, and make the code more readable.
>>
>> Ramiro Polla
>
>> ?swscale-example.c | ? 18 +++++-------------
>> ?1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>> 25ea61201ddc473c339d7cd62724b78580bdc529 ?0006-swscale-example-Remove-hack-to-end-loop-by-setting.patch
>> From 9490df4c8ed893d52be36dd001664ec3bb524aa3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Ramiro Polla <ramiro.polla at gmail.com>
>> Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:39:57 -0300
>> Subject: [PATCH] swscale-example: Remove hack to end loop by setting variables to break.
>>
>> ---
>> ?swscale-example.c | ? 18 +++++-------------
>> ?1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/swscale-example.c b/swscale-example.c
>> index f496d0f..f48c8ba 100644
>> --- a/swscale-example.c
>> +++ b/swscale-example.c
>> @@ -185,6 +185,8 @@ static void selfTest(uint8_t *src[4], int stride[4], int w, int h){
>>
>> ? ? ?for (srcFormat = 0; srcFormat < PIX_FMT_NB; srcFormat++) {
>> ? ? ? ? ?for (dstFormat = 0; dstFormat < PIX_FMT_NB; dstFormat++) {
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ?int res = 0;
>> +
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ?printf("%s -> %s\n",
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? sws_format_name(srcFormat),
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? sws_format_name(dstFormat));
>> @@ -192,21 +194,11 @@ static void selfTest(uint8_t *src[4], int stride[4], int w, int h){
>>
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ?srcW= w;
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ?srcH= h;
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ?for (dstW=w - w/3; dstW<= 4*w/3; dstW+= w/3){
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?for (dstH=h - h/3; dstH<= 4*h/3; dstH+= h/3){
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?for (flags=1; flags<33; flags*=2) {
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?int res;
>> -
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ?for (dstW=w - w/3; !res && dstW<= 4*w/3; dstW+= w/3)
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?for (dstH=h - h/3; !res && dstH<= 4*h/3; dstH+= h/3)
>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?for (flags=1; !res && flags<33; flags*=2)
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?res = doTest(src, stride, w, h, srcFormat, dstFormat,
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? srcW, srcH, dstW, dstH, flags);
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?if (res < 0) {
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?dstW = 4 * w / 3;
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?dstH = 4 * h / 3;
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?flags = 33;
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?}
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?}
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?}
>> - ? ? ? ? ? ?}
>> ? ? ? ? ?}
>> ? ? ?}
>> ?}
>
> ok as its alot better than now but i think ideally a

Applied.

> if(res<0)
> ? ?print error message
> ? ?return -1 / goto end
>
> would be better

I'll send a patch later.