On 06/10/2011 06:31 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > + case PIX_FMT_RGB48LE: > + //*yuv2packed1 = yuv2rgb48le_1_c; > + //*yuv2packed2 = yuv2rgb48le_2_c; > + //*yuv2packedX = yuv2rgb48le_X_c; > + //break; > + case PIX_FMT_RGB48BE: > + *yuv2packed1 = yuv2rgb48be_1_c; > + *yuv2packed2 = yuv2rgb48be_2_c; > + *yuv2packedX = yuv2rgb48be_X_c; > + break; > + case PIX_FMT_BGR48LE: > + //*yuv2packed1 = yuv2bgr48le_1_c; > + //*yuv2packed2 = yuv2bgr48le_2_c; > + //*yuv2packedX = yuv2bgr48le_X_c; > + //break; > + case PIX_FMT_BGR48BE: > + *yuv2packed1 = yuv2bgr48be_1_c; > + *yuv2packed2 = yuv2bgr48be_2_c; > + *yuv2packedX = yuv2bgr48be_X_c;
unless they are going away soon, i think those commented-out parts need a comment there to say why. besides that and my macro suggestion (take it or leave it), patch looks ok. certainly it is much easier to understand what's going on, even if there is some duplication. Thanks, Justin _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
