On 22/01/15 4:52 PM, wm4 wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jan 2015 16:43:16 -0300 > James Almer <jamr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 22/01/15 4:27 PM, wm4 wrote: >>> Then I'd definitely vote for remove. >>> >>> The asm probably mattered on ancient CPUs and ancient compilers, but >>> there's no reason to keep it anymore. >> >> No. If the handwritten asm is better than the C code, even if slightly, then >> it should not be removed. >> And if someone dislikes its inline asm nature then they are free to port it, >> like i did with a couple other filters before. > > For such a small difference, your statement is ridiculous. > > No, really.
Grab any audio file and try to decode it, manually disabling different audio dsp functions it uses from libavcodec/libswresample and recompiling, and see how much each of them affect overall decoding speed. You'll find that many don't even seem to have any effect if you only check with time, yet are still 2 to 4 times faster than their C counterparts. Do you want to remove them as well? _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
