[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] remove limits from af_equalizer

[The Wanderer]

Corey Hickey wrote:

> Reynaldo H. Verdejo Pinochet wrote:

>>> Probably a wider range would be fine, but I consider it
>>> unnecessary. Any value chosen would be arbitrary, and any value
>>> high enough to avoid restricting the amplification of a quiet
>>> source would be high enough to be damaging to a loud source.
>>> 
>>> The current limits encompass most of the useful values, and I
>>> noted that in my patch to the man page. I've attached a new patch
>>> that describes more accurately what happens with suboption values
>>> that are too high.
>> 
>> Ok Corey, if flexibility is the issue I'll back you on this one,
>> still I'll need you to make some measurements to determine a db
>> range that will (~overall) *work* without making a mess of the
>> output, add that range to the man page and Ill commit if no one
>> complains.
> 
> Sorry this took me so long -- I got caught up in preparing for the
> Doom9 codec comparison and had to set this aside for a while.
> 
> The application of my other patch to af_equalizer (which removed an
> unnecessary divide by 40) makes af_equalizer way more sensitive than
> it used to be. Useful values are only between -2 and 2, whereas they
> should be between -12 and 12. Setting a suboption to 3 shouldn't
> cause out-of-range values. I don't think my other patch was wrong,
> but I think it only fixes half the bug. I spent a while looking at
> af_equalizer.c, but I didn't find a solution. I can understand the
> source ok, but I don't know how it should be.
> 
> I wanted to fix it myself before I sent in another patch removing the
> limits, but at this point I have to give up. As it is right now,
> with af_equalizer's sensitivity, the limits are way higher than they
> need to be anyhow. If that bug is fixed, then my previous patch 
> (equalizer-remove-limits2.diff) will probably be relevant. Otherwise,
> you might as well drop it.

Do I understand correctly that, the brief ensuing comments
notwithstanding, this means that the patch is withdrawn?

-- 
       The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.