On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 09:32:48AM +0000, Måns Rullgård
wrote:
> Rich Felker <dalias aerifal.cx> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 01:32:14AM +0000, Måns
Rullgård wrote:
> >> Another possibility is to precede each
optional field with a 1-bit
> >> flag indicating its presence. The size of the
containing element can
> >> then also implicitly exclude any unused fields
at the end. This may
> >> of course not be desired for frequently
repeated elements where the
> >> flags could be specified in a global header.
> >
> > I hope you understand, a 1bit field means a 1byte
field. NUT has no
> > support for sub-byte data units except when
they're appropriately
> > padded with reserved bits.
>
> Sounds like a deficiency.
In what respect? That is what would we gain with droping
byte alignment?
I think we would gain a lot of complexity primarely ;)
[...]
--
Michael GnuPG fingerprint:
9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB
Breaking DRM is a little like attempting to break through a
door even
though the window is wide open and the only thing in the
house is a bunch
of things you dont want and which you would get tomorrow for
free anyway
_______________________________________________
NUT-devel mailing list
NUT-devel mplayerhq.hu
https://lists.mplayerhq.hu/mailman/listinfo/nut-devel
|