On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 07:45:25PM +0200, Andreas Cadhalpun wrote: > On 25.10.2016 12:58, Paul B Mahol wrote: > > patch(es)have good intent, but better fix is doing/checking it in single > > place. > > I don't agree. > In general, validity checks should be where the values are actually read. > This eliminates the risk that bogus values could cause problems between being > set > and being checked. > Also, having only a check in a central place is bad for debugging, because it > is > not immediately clear where the bogus value came from, when the check is > triggered. > (I know this from personal experience debugging all the cases triggering the > assert in av_rescale_rnd.) > > The problem with that approach is that such checks can easily be forgotten, > which > is why I think a check in a central place would make sense in addition to > checking > the individual cases.
some formats may also lack a sample rate like mpeg ps/ts the fact is known insude the demuxer, generic code after it doesnt know. Doing the only check after the parser is a bit late OTOH [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB What does censorship reveal? It reveals fear. -- Julian Assange
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
