Am 02.02.2018 11:58 nachm. schrieb "Muhammad Faiz" <mfc...@gmail.com>:
On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 1:55 AM, Hendrik Leppkes <h.lepp...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Muhammad Faiz <mfc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 10:23 PM, Josh de Kock <j...@itanimul.li> wrote: >>> >>>> On 1 Feb 2018, at 18:51, Muhammad Faiz <mfc...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:25 AM, Josh de Kock <j...@itanimul.li> wrote: >>>>> Also replace linked list with an array. >>>>> --- >>>>> configure | 12 +- >>>>> doc/APIchanges | 4 + >>>>> libavcodec/.gitignore | 2 + >>>>> libavcodec/allcodecs.c | 1473 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- ------------------ >>>>> libavcodec/avcodec.h | 31 + >>>>> libavcodec/parser.c | 84 ++- >>>>> libavcodec/utils.c | 112 ---- >>>>> libavcodec/version.h | 3 + >>>>> 8 files changed, 971 insertions(+), 750 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>> >>>> I have a plan to sort codecs based on name and codec_id (which overlap >>>> with this patch). Is it OK if I overtake this? >>>> If it is not OK, I will wait until this patchset pushed. >>>> >>> >>> I am unsure why you would need to sort codecs. >> >> For performance reason. > > Performance of what? avcodec_find_decoder/encoder (by using bsearch). Considering you can have multiple of those for any given codec Id and order matters, that seems like a risky idea, or a rather complex one at least. Perhaps not the first (or second) place to start optimization. - Hendrik _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
