On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:23:07AM -0800, Dale Curtis wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 10:23 PM Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> > wrote: > > > so i think it works but maybe ive missed something, for which values > > of e2_pts do you see a problem with e1_pts = INT64_MIN? > > > > For e1_pts = INT64_MIN and e2_pts >= 0 you end up with a negative int64_t > result for e2_pts - (uint64_t)e1_pts, so it's always < time_tolerance. If > that's what you intended, then sgtm.
thats what the code would do if the elemnts where large enough to not overflow so that seems to match whats intended. Do you see some issue here ? If the idea is that extreem values are likely invalid and should be treated special, then yes but to detect such values using the equations overflow seems not correct. Similarly any other special values if they reach this function should be checked for more explicitly Thanks [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB it is not once nor twice but times without number that the same ideas make their appearance in the world. -- Aristotle
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".
