Re: [RFC v2] Reed-Solomon Code: Update no_eras to the actual number of errors

Hi, You are right. I forgot the return value is number of errors rather than status code. Sorry to bother you. On 6/25/20 6:06 AM, Ferdinand Blomqvist wrote: Hi! On 2020-06-25 00:36:01, Aiden Leong wrote: Corr and eras_pos are updated to actual correction pattern and erasure positions, but

Re: [RFC v2] Reed-Solomon Code: Update no_eras to the actual number of errors

Hi! On 2020-06-25 00:36:01, Aiden Leong wrote: Corr and eras_pos are updated to actual correction pattern and erasure positions, but no_eras is not. When this library is used to recover lost bytes, we normally memset the lost trunk of bytes to zero as a placeholder. Unfortunately, if the lost b

[RFC v2] Reed-Solomon Code: Update no_eras to the actual number of errors

Corr and eras_pos are updated to actual correction pattern and erasure positions, but no_eras is not. When this library is used to recover lost bytes, we normally memset the lost trunk of bytes to zero as a placeholder. Unfortunately, if the lost byte is zero, b[i] is zero too. Without correct no_