On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 01:47:10PM +0100, Michael
Niedermayer wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 07:53:10AM +0200, Oded Shimon
wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 05, 2006 at 06:31:32PM -0800, Ralph
Giles wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 01:56:53AM +0100,
Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > >
> > > > thats ~ 20 bytes per frame overhead or ~
0.11%
> > > > with 15k frames it would have been ~ 11
or ~ 0.07%
> > > > with 2mb frames you would end up with ~
22 byte or ~ 0.001%
> > >
> > > Thanks, Michael. Could you do a similar
sketch for vorbis audio? I tried
> > > nutmerge on a couple of files and it reported
1.2-1.5% overhead, and
> > > was curious if the claimed 2 bytes per frame
is possible with vorbis.
> >
> > If you modify nutmerge.c, there's a table at the
top, you need to change
> > it to this:
>
> what about generating a more optimal table
automatically? like the lavf
> muxer did? should all users of libnut hack the source
depening on what
> they want to put in nut?
It's on the TODO list. 
- ods15
_______________________________________________
NUT-devel mailing list
NUT-devel mplayerhq.hu
http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/nut-devel
|