[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] H.264/SQV3 separation: h264data.h

Diego Biurrun diego
Tue Dec 16 14:52:11 CET 2008

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 01:31:32PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:01:34AM +0100, Panagiotis Issaris wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 02:26 +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > There have been tons of changes to h264.c that were not subjected to the
> > > > speed inquisition, everything PAFF-related jumps to my mind for example.
> > > 
> > > benchmarking past changes is welcome, i surely think we should do that one
> > > day and look into speedlosses.
> > 
> > Now this isn't not exactly fair, is it? Those benchmarks should have
> > occurred before the patches got applied. You can't expect people to
> > accept there patches being rejected for some speed loss, while others
> > got committed without benchmarking.
> *if you care why did you not
>  complain when whatever changes you speak of got commited?
>  And if you dont care, why do you complain now?

He is complaining about the relative fairness of the treatment.  Other
changes are not subjected to extensive benchmarking requirements, this
one is.

> Besides, instead of telling me that i should accept some patch that has
> not fully understood sideeffects. Dont you think it would be more
> productive if you did work on some code, be that this patch or another?

That's a bad argument, it would also be more productive if you fixed
filter_mb_fast instead of arguing here or ported optimizations from x264
or ...


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list