[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 4/4] Add MxPEG decoder

[Måns Rullgård]

Anatoly Nenashev <anatoly.nenashev at ovsoft.ru> writes:

> On 17.02.2011 01:07, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> Anatoly Nenashev<anatoly.nenashev at ovsoft.ru>  writes:
>>
>>    
>>> On 17.02.2011 00:40, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>>>      
>>>> Anatoly Nenashev<anatoly.nenashev at ovsoft.ru>   writes:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>>    From e6a735d5d70e4ab64053e6223cb5a6296145cb26 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>>>> From: anatoly<anatoly.nenashev at ovsoft.ru>
>>>>> Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 23:28:07 +0300
>>>>> Subject: [PATCH 4/4] Add MxPEG decoder
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    libavcodec/Makefile    |    1 +
>>>>>    libavcodec/allcodecs.c |    1 +
>>>>>    libavcodec/mxpegdec.c  |  326 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>    3 files changed, 328 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>>    create mode 100644 libavcodec/mxpegdec.c
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>> This duplicates a lot of code from mjpegdec.c.  That is not good.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> I'm not agree with it. What part exactly was copypasted from original code?
>>>      
>> The big loop in decode_frame() is largely duplicated.  Your original
>> patch only added a few small bits to it.
>>
>>    
> Hmm... Let's compare them in details:
> 1) mxpeg_decode_app is simpler than mjpeg_decode_app
> 2) EOI processing is simpler
> 3) COM processing is much different
> 4) only SOF0 marker are supported, other SOFx markers are ignored
> 5) there is no restart_marker support
> 6) there is no DRI marker support
> 7) SOS processing is much different
> 8) the code at the label "the_end" is also different.
>
> The only common parts are main loop "while" and case's names in
> "switch". To implement all this  stuff in original mjpeg code I should
> add a lot of "if else" in each "case" body. I don't think it makes
> code clearer and faster.

OK, it's more different that it seemed at a glance.  Sorry for the noise.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com