On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Vittorio Giovara
>>
>> No, as I said I can compromise in simply moving "undefined" state to
>> value 2, so that if there is a remote case where this is useful it can
>> be still achieved. If that would be ok
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Vittorio Giovara
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Vittorio Giovara
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:10 PM, wm4 wrote:
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:29:20 +0100
Vittorio Giovara wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Vittorio Giovara
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:10 PM, wm4 wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:29:20 +0100
>>> Vittorio Giovara wrote:
>>>
>>> Also h264/hevc are not the only video codecs on the
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Vittorio Giovara
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:10 PM, wm4 wrote:
>> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:29:20 +0100
>> Vittorio Giovara wrote:
>>
>>> >>> Also h264/hevc are not the only video codecs on the planet. Implicit
>>> >>> defaults in the data type is the wrong w
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:10 PM, wm4 wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:29:20 +0100
> Vittorio Giovara wrote:
>
>> >>> Also h264/hevc are not the only video codecs on the planet. Implicit
>> >>> defaults in the data type is the wrong way to go about this, it takes
>> >>> away any kind of flexibility
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> Quoting Vittorio Giovara (2016-12-20 12:29:20)
>> mm would you be okay with moving unspecified to 2 so that at least the
>> most common usecase can be mapped to a bool?
>
> I think the API should be designed in such a way that it is hard to u
On Tue, 20 Dec 2016 12:29:20 +0100
Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> >>> Also h264/hevc are not the only video codecs on the planet. Implicit
> >>> defaults in the data type is the wrong way to go about this, it takes
> >>> away any kind of flexibility for no real gain.
> >>
> >> What kind of flexibili
Quoting Vittorio Giovara (2016-12-20 12:29:20)
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Vittorio Giovara
> > wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Hendrik Leppkes
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Vittorio Giovara
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Vittorio Giovara
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Hendrik Leppkes
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Vittorio Giovara
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Hendrik
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Vittorio Giovara
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Vittorio Giovara
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Hendrik Leppkes
>>> wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Vittorio G
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Vittorio Giovara
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Hendrik Leppkes
>> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Vittorio Giovara
>>> wrote:
This is the assumption that is made everyw
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Vittorio Giovara
wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Vittorio Giovara
>> wrote:
>>> This is the assumption that is made everywhere in the codebase
>>> and in several specifications too. The added
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Vittorio Giovara
> wrote:
>> This is the assumption that is made everywhere in the codebase
>> and in several specifications too. The added benefit is that any
>> variable referencing range can now be simp
Quoting Hendrik Leppkes (2016-12-20 10:40:41)
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Vittorio Giovara
> wrote:
> > This is the assumption that is made everywhere in the codebase
> > and in several specifications too. The added benefit is that any
> > variable referencing range can now be simply consid
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Vittorio Giovara
wrote:
> This is the assumption that is made everywhere in the codebase
> and in several specifications too. The added benefit is that any
> variable referencing range can now be simply considered a boolean.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vittorio Giovara
I
This is the assumption that is made everywhere in the codebase
and in several specifications too. The added benefit is that any
variable referencing range can now be simply considered a boolean.
Signed-off-by: Vittorio Giovara
---
This is the first patch I had in mind for the transition period af
16 matches
Mail list logo
