--- Erik de Castro Lopo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I added -Wmissing-prototypes -Wstrict-prototypes to the CFLAGS and
found that there were a number warnings generated.
The patch below fixes those warnings and adds the two -W flags to
configure.in.
I checked most of it in, though
Josh Coalson wrote:
--- Erik de Castro Lopo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I added -Wmissing-prototypes -Wstrict-prototypes to the CFLAGS and
found that there were a number warnings generated.
The patch below fixes those warnings and adds the two -W flags to
configure.in.
2007/7/23, Greg M. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I just tried this with Goldwave.. it decoded the file,
i edited out some stuff, and saved the file (flac
format) and the tags appear to be intact.
thanks a lot, it seems to work with Goldwave. Exactly what I was looking
for!
thx
Greg M.
--- Tomas
hi FLAC list!
I have a general question about the FLAC decoder. Is it true the FLAC
decoder requires less CPU power then a MP3 decoder? And if yes, is there
somebody who can give me a comparison e.g. FLAC decoder uses 50% less CPU
power then a MP3 decoder or is this difference only minimal?
thx
The amount of CPU the FLAC encoder uses is dependant on how much
compression you will use. The less compression you need, the less CPU
power that will be used.
Of course, the whole point of FLAC is to get as much compression as
possible without losing any audio fidelity.
I don't know of any
On 7/24/07, Greg M. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ivo, Harry is asking about CPU usage of the DEcoder,
not the ENcoder.
Sorry, my bad.
I believe that FLAC's decoding is somewhat faster than most other
lossless formats, as FLAC is a much less complex format.
