[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Fix warnings in bidir_refine (in libavcodec/motion_est.c)

[Måns Rullgård]

Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes:

> 2010/7/6 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
>> Eli Friedman <eli.friedman at gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> 2010/7/3 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
>>>> The warnings this thread is about are of the rare variety which cannot
>>>> be so easily silenced without adding clutter or having the actual code
>>>> change.
>>>
>>> Is the attached sufficiently unobtrusive to be acceptable?
>>>
>>> -Eli
>>>
>>> Index: motion_est.c
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- motion_est.c ? ? ?(revision 24018)
>>> +++ motion_est.c ? ? ?(working copy)
>>> @@ -1509,22 +1509,23 @@
>>> ?{ 1, 1, 1,-1}, {-1,-1,-1, 1}, { 1, 1,-1, 1}, {-1,-1, 1,-1}, { 1,-1, 1, 1}, {-1, 1,-1,-1}, {-1, 1, 1, 1}, { 1,-1,-1,-1},
>>> ?{ 1, 1,-1,-1}, {-1,-1, 1, 1}, { 1,-1,-1, 1}, {-1, 1, 1,-1}, { 1,-1, 1,-1}, {-1, 1,-1, 1},
>>> ? ? ? ? ?};
>>> +#define HASH_T(fx,fy,bx,by) ((uint8_t)HASH(fx,fy,bx,by))
>>
>> What meaning is _T intended to convey? ?See also
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.ffmpeg.devel/112370
>
> It was supposed to stand for "truncated", but that isn't really
> clear... changed to HASH8, like you suggested in the referenced
> thread.

So now we have two copies of the same patch, yet are no closer to
having it fixed.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com