On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 04:16:48PM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 01:27:17PM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > + * Really, the only reason this type of scaling (fast bilinear) > >> > exists > >> > + * is because it allowed for certain types of MMX/MMX2 > >> > optimizations. > >> > + * In most practical cases, there is no reason to use this type of > >> > + * scaling. > >> > >> I think we should remove this part, it's not very positive and doesn't > >> add anything... > > > > What about keeping just the second sentence: > > > > * In most practical cases, there is no reason to use this type of > > * scaling. > > I consider it patronizing to tell a user what to do or what not to do...
I tend to disagree, but I could not care less in this particular case, so pushed without. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
