On 28/08/2024 16:13, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Frank Plowman (2024-08-25 13:50:41)
>> These assertions are not violated, even by illegal bitstreams.
>
> I don't follow this argument, not being violated by any reachable
> runtime path is exactly how a correctly written assert should behave.
>
The point I was trying to make is that I have not seen the assertion
violated (besides the false positives qPy_{a,b} = 63) in my fuzz
testing. Along with the fact the derivation procedure for qPy_{a,b} is
not all that complicated and largely contained in this one function, one
might consider the assertions unnecessary.
That being said, I would prefer not to remove the assertions and instead
to apply the first version of this patch. It seems recent discussion on
the thread of v1 is leaning back that way as well.
--
Frank
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
