Paul B Mahol (12019-05-12): > That is hard problem, how would one know what implementation is best for > user scenario.
Better developers who know the limits of their filters than users who do not know. > I disagree, current filter have artifacts with small scale factors. And that is what you are about to fix, is it not? > Looks like I missed to explain it in more fashion to you full understanding, > it is filter that uses external library, do you still insist it to be > part of atempo? I know that. And yes, of course. > Looks like you missed to understand my detailed explanation. > Lets try it to explain in again, in more detailed fashion: > I mean there would be two filters doing same thing: > apitch with 1st option pitch and 2nd option tempo. > atempo with 1st option tempo and 2nd option pitch. > These filters would share same C file. Indeed, I missed the fact that you did not understand: No, there will no be an apitch filter, whether it lives in af_apitch.c or af_atempo.c. There will be a single filter, named atempo, that will bring the best quality to all users, existing and new ones. -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 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".
