On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 06:24:55AM +0000, Ronald S. Bultje wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 12:27:48AM +0200, Janne Grunau wrote: > >> --- a/libswscale/utils.c > >> +++ b/libswscale/utils.c > >> @@ -817,11 +817,11 @@ int sws_init_context(SwsContext *c, SwsFilter > >> *srcFilter, SwsFilter *dstFilter) > >> > >> if (!isSupportedIn(srcFormat)) { > >> - av_log(NULL, AV_LOG_ERROR, "swScaler: %s is not supported as > >> input pixel format\n", sws_format_name(srcFormat)); > >> + av_log(c, AV_LOG_ERROR, "%s is not supported as input pixel > >> format\n", sws_format_name(srcFormat)); > > > > extra good karma for breaking long lines > > We had a rule for this: > A) no new patches necessary for these kind of comments, and
Sure :) > B) you can fix it yourself. And I do it, witness the patches I sent for AVX and the DTS encoder... > Let's try to keep stuff moving, I see a lot of nitpick-style comments > again and they're not always as helpful as they're intended... But only comments can keep us moving forwards. When I see a function with 17 (!) parameters, I cannot help but make a remark. This does not imply that I expect the poor soul that made a change to that monster to singlehandedly refactor it. Nor do I expect all or any of my minor comments to be implemented, but I believe that every little bit helps, so I'm always happy when people do implement minor comments, which also happens. I read patches to learn from them, sometimes I think that I might as well read them in the editor and comment here and there ... I may be allowed to mention here that I am currently into the third day of a refactoring avalanche that started from me noticing a warning due to wrong printf specifiers, which led to Justing suggesting to eliminate int_fast types, which led to Mans suggesting to make more fine-grained changes which is maybe leading to implementing sizeof trickery... Did I reach my initial goal? Sort of. Am I complaining? No. Is it improving Libav? Yes. Maybe we should just classify our review comments with [H] [M] [L] tags for high, medium and low priority. I already try to do that somewhat by talking about nits and karma bonus points... Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
