From: Vincent M. <Vin...@ne...> - 2004-11-08 21:24:58
|
Mike Melanson wrote: > I will evaluate this patch. Thanks for testing. Not sure about > this part: > > this->running_time /= this->sample_rate / 1000 > > Does that mean (running_time / sample_rate), then / 1000; or > (sample_rate / 1000) and divide running_time by that quotient? I think > it is important in the case of sample_rate == 44100. > Yes right. I only tested with 48000 hz (most ac3), so I didn't see this bug. Maybe it's better a : this->running_time /= this->sample_rate; and then : this->running_time *= 1000; // (just here to have milliseconds) But we are loosing precision. Maybe it's better with a float between... Thank you Vincent |