On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 10:44 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Claudio Freire
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Rostislav Pehlivanov
>> wrote:
>>> Wouldn't it be simpler to just check if the maximum codebook was 0 after
>>> calculating cost1 and skipping t
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Claudio Freire wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Rostislav Pehlivanov
> wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be simpler to just check if the maximum codebook was 0 after
>> calculating cost1 and skipping the rest of the code in the loop?
>>
>> On 29 December 2015 at 08:2
On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Rostislav Pehlivanov
wrote:
> Wouldn't it be simpler to just check if the maximum codebook was 0 after
> calculating cost1 and skipping the rest of the code in the loop?
>
> On 29 December 2015 at 08:23, Claudio Freire wrote:
>
>> Fixes an assertion error reported
Wouldn't it be simpler to just check if the maximum codebook was 0 after
calculating cost1 and skipping the rest of the code in the loop?
On 29 December 2015 at 08:23, Claudio Freire wrote:
> Fixes an assertion error reported in #2686 that happens when
> using prediction (either explicitly or im
Fixes an assertion error reported in #2686 that happens when
using prediction (either explicitly or implicitly by setting
the AAC main profile), since prediction code would allow
creating new zeroes or removing existing ones, without
properly checking for SF delta violations.
This patch forbids cr
