[Ffmpeg-devel] Re: [PATCH] MXF tag parser

Michael Niedermayer michaelni
Wed Aug 2 22:41:16 CEST 2006


On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 04:01:59PM +0200, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> Reimar D?ffinger wrote:
> > Hello,
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 03:14:55PM +0200, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> >>> It also changes quite a few types from int to uint32_t, because
> >>> 1) I think it's more correct
> >> Isn't "int" always at least 32bit ? 

no, but a system where its not wont support ffmpeg ...

> >> If types size are exactly like in
> >> 377M I'm all for it, can you please seperate that patch from the other ?
> > 
> > Yes, but I like to it more explicit. But the "more correct" is more
> > about signed vs. unsigned.
> I prefer the simplest way.

*int32_t as we all know means exactly 32bits so its not really correct

uint_fast32_t or uint_least32_t would be most correct if you want to be
pedantic, if not then int / unsigned int seems to be the logic choice ...

Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

In the past you could go to a library and read, borrow or copy any book
Today you'd get arrested for mere telling someone where the library is

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list