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

Uoti Urpala uoti.urpala
Tue Dec 16 21:53:24 CET 2008

On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 12:32 -0800, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> Uoti Urpala wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-12-16 at 11:48 -0800, Baptiste Coudurier wrote:
> >> Well, considering the "random" factor is discussed here, I won't
> >> take words for granted. If you want to make your point valid, give
> >> a code example.
> > 
> > How would giving a code example affect its validity?
> You know, what is called "proof".

What would it prove? I already gave the results. You can't reproduce the
same ones so it's pointless to give the exact same code. But you should
be able to reproduce the existence of random variation with the method I

> > Did my description of the change not give enough information about
> > it? It's not like you could yourself verify that the particular
> > example I used behaves the way I said - it's unlikely the random
> > effects would be the same on your system.
> > 
> > If you want to test the random effects yourself I gave one way to do 
> > that above.
> What are you trying to say here ?

That you can't reproduce the same random values I did. If you want to
verify the existence of random variation you need to find the samples
that show differences on your system.

> That no benchmark ever can be trusted, because it has everything has
> random effects on every system ?

That has nothing to do with what I was saying in the part I quoted. But
what I've said elsewhere in the thread is basically that small benchmark
changes show little else than the absence of very significant changes
either way.

> >>>>>> if i remove some unneeded code and that results in a 0.5%
> >>>>>> gain on one machine chances are it also does on most
> >>>>>> others, its not as if the removial of code will likely make
> >>>>>> it slower.
> >>>>> You can expect that removal of useless code won't make things
> >>>>> slower _on average_. However if the CPU use of the removed
> >>>>> code was significantly less than 0.5%
> >>>> ??? Code was _useless_ so CPU did never _use_ it.
> >>> By "useless" I mean both unused code and code which is executed
> >>> but makes no difference to the computation result.
> >> I hope and assume this is not the case with current code, so your
> >> point is void.
> > 
> > Your comment makes no sense whatsoever. What are you trying to say?
> Im saying that your point is void because the current code is assumed to

Which "your point"? I don't see how your claim would make any sense if
interpreted to be about my main point in this thread.

> not contain anything useless, and adding "useless" code would be stupid,
> but I thought mentioning this would be useless as this is obvious.

Your comments here are such complete nonsense it's hard to even tell
what mistake you're making and correct it...

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list