[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] Escape 124 (RPL) decoder rev2

Måns Rullgård mans
Sat Mar 29 01:36:09 CET 2008

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

> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 4:11 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> wrote:
>>  [...]
>>  > +static CodeBook* unpack_codebook(GetBitContext* gb, uint32_t depth,
>>  > +                                 uint32_t length, uint32_t alloc_length) {
>>  > +    uint32_t i, j;
>>  These dont need to be exactly 32 bit, so unsigned (int) seems more
>>  appropriate.
> They need to be more than 16 bits, so unsigned isn't appropriate.

What is that supposed to mean?  If you are seriously worried that
someone might try to use this code on a 16-bit system (not that it
will have the slightest chance of working), use unsigned long.  The
required width of the type is irrelevant to the applicability of
the unsigned type specifier.

M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list