On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 06:29:09PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Michael Niedermayer
>> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 06:07:17PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 06:29:09PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 06:07:17PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> >> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> >> wrote:
> >> [...]
> >> > 2. ac
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 06:07:17PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> [...]
>> > 2. accuracy - yes, I am the only one who seems to care about it enough
>> > to bring it up
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 06:07:17PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> [...]
> > 2. accuracy - yes, I am the only one who seems to care about it enough
> > to bring it up everytime. On the other hand, I have documented the
> > caveat and
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
[...]
> 2. accuracy - yes, I am the only one who seems to care about it enough
> to bring it up everytime. On the other hand, I have documented the
> caveat and will transfer relevant information to avpriv_exp10 if we go
> that route, so I
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 01:39:36AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 03:52:50PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Michael Niedermayer
>> > wrote:
>> > > On Wed, Dec 23, 20
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 01:39:36AM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 03:52:50PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Michael Niedermayer
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:47:20AM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> > >> exp10(x) i
Am 24.12.2015 23:01 schrieb "Ronald S. Bultje" :
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>
> > Also, over time I would like to cleanup the avutil/libm header: there
> > are macros in places where there should really be functions, though
> > Hendrik points out that
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> Also, over time I would like to cleanup the avutil/libm header: there
> are macros in places where there should really be functions, though
> Hendrik points out that in some cases there is no real alternative. At
> the moment, most
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> What I
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> > wrote:
> >
> >> What I meant was the following (I casually labelled it as ifdef, I
> >> meant som
On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 8:37 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>
>> What I meant was the following (I casually labelled it as ifdef, I
>> meant some preprocessor stuff):
>> #if !HAVE_EXP10 || !(defined(_GNU_SOURCE))
>> ...
>> #endif
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> What I meant was the following (I casually labelled it as ifdef, I
> meant some preprocessor stuff):
> #if !HAVE_EXP10 || !(defined(_GNU_SOURCE))
> ...
> #endif
>
> I have reproduced your issues via a minimal configure line, and th
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 03:52:50PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Michael Niedermayer
>> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:47:20AM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> >> exp10(x) is superior t
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 03:52:50PM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:47:20AM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> >> exp10(x) is superior to pow(10,x).
> >> Note that in some cases, this may affect integers
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:47:20AM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> exp10(x) is superior to pow(10,x).
>> Note that in some cases, this may affect integers derived from pow calls.
>> When
>> spotted, this remark has been added to th
On Wed, Dec 23, 2015 at 10:47:20AM -0800, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> exp10(x) is superior to pow(10,x).
> Note that in some cases, this may affect integers derived from pow calls. When
> spotted, this remark has been added to the relevant commit message.
>
> Note that if such a thing is troubleso
exp10(x) is superior to pow(10,x).
Note that in some cases, this may affect integers derived from pow calls. When
spotted, this remark has been added to the relevant commit message.
Note that if such a thing is troublesome, one can do one of two things:
1. leave the pow(10,x) call as is in such pl
18 matches
Mail list logo
