On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 07:18:33PM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: > "Ronald S. Bultje" <[email protected]> writes: > > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:25:00AM -0700, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > >>> --- a/libswscale/swscale_unscaled.c > >>> +++ b/libswscale/swscale_unscaled.c > >>> @@ -454,18 +454,20 @@ static int packedCopyWrapper(SwsContext *c, const > >>> uint8_t* src[], int srcStride[ > >>> > >>> for (i = 0; i < height; i++) { \ > >>> const uint8_t *dither = dithers[i & 7]; \ > >>> for (j = 0; j < length - 7; j += 8) { \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 0], (rfunc(&src[j + 0]) + dither[0]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 1], (rfunc(&src[j + 1]) + dither[1]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 2], (rfunc(&src[j + 2]) + dither[2]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 3], (rfunc(&src[j + 3]) + dither[3]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 4], (rfunc(&src[j + 4]) + dither[4]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 5], (rfunc(&src[j + 5]) + dither[5]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 6], (rfunc(&src[j + 6]) + dither[6]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> - wfunc(&dst[j + 7], (rfunc(&src[j + 7]) + dither[7]) >> > >>> shift); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 0], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 0]) + dither[0]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 1], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 1]) + dither[1]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 2], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 2]) + dither[2]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 3], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 3]) + dither[3]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 4], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 4]) + dither[4]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 5], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 5]) + dither[5]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 6], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 6]) + dither[6]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >>> + wfunc(&dst[j + 7], clip((rfunc(&src[j + 7]) + dither[7]) >> > >>> shift)); \ > >> > >> unrelated: There are some parentheses in there that you could shed > >> while you're at it... > > > > Like which? > > I don't see any.
'+' is higher priority than '>>', so there's one set that could be dropped in theory, but I already told Ronald on IRC to just ignore my comment... Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
