Reimar Döffinger wrote:
Hello, On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 11:10:51AM -0800, Corey Hickey wrote: [...]
(a) Use my patch, which is already written and runs reasonably quickly. (b) Use the patches for reordering in each encoder/decoder, which are already written and run almost as quickly. (c) Leave the bug alone and hope it motivates someone to spend a lot of time making a better solution.
If anyone steps forward and says they'll try to implement your suggestions in the near future, then I have no objections to (c). Otherwise, I think we ought to apply what we have, since this is a user-visible bug that people ask about once in a while. I prefer (a), as I explained earlier, but I won't be militant about it you have good reasons to prefer (b).
Does anyone else have objections? I do dislike the significant added complexity for af.c of solution (a), though I did not check if it can be simplified. If it can't I'd prefer (b).
I don't know if it can be simplified. I see a couple things that could be different, but not necessarily better. In any case, the complexity of (a) is centralized, versus being distributed into many separate files (and only slightly lessened in most cases). Adding support to an ad/ae/ao is much easier with my approach. Have you looked at the patches for (b)? I don't seem to have provided a link earlier. http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/mplayer-dev-eng/2006-October/046993.html Thanks, Corey