3, 4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 0, -1, -3, -4
};
-static const int ct_adpcm_table[8] = {
- 0x00E6, 0x00E6, 0x00E6, 0x00E6,
- 0x0133, 0x0199, 0x0200, 0x0266
-};
-
// padded to zero where table size is less then 16
static const int swf_index_tables[4][16] = {
/*2*/ { -1, 2 },
c->predictor = ((c->predictor * 254) >> 8) + (sign ? -diff : diff);
c->predictor = av_clip_int16(c->predictor);
/* calculate new step and clamp it to range 511..32767 */
- new_step = (ct_adpcm_table[nibble & 7] * c->step) >> 8;
+ new_step = (AdaptationTable[nibble & 7] * c->step) >> 8;
c->step = av_clip(new_step, 511, 32767);
return (short)c->predictor;
static const int16_t ydt3[8] = { 4, -6, 20, -20, 46, -46, 94, -94 };
static const int16_t fat_ydt3[8] = { 0, -15, 50, -50, 115, -115, 235, -235 };
static const int16_t ydt4[8] = { 0, -4, 4, -16, 16, -36, 36, -80 };
+/* NOTE: This table breaks the [+,-] pattern that the rest of the
+ * tables maintain. Is this intentional? */
static const int16_t fat_ydt4[8] = { 0, 40, 80, -76, 160, -154, 236, -236 };
/* C delta tables, skinny and fat */
static const int16_t cdt2[8] = { 0, -4, 3, -16, 20, -32, 36, -32 };
static const int16_t fat_cdt2[8] = { 0, -20, 15, -80, 100, -160, 180, -160 };
static const int16_t cdt3[8] = { 0, -2, 2, -8, 8, -18, 18, -40 };
-/* NOTE: This table breaks the [+,-] pattern that the rest of the
- * tables maintain. Is this intentional? */
-static const int16_t fat_cdt3[8] = { 0, 40, 80, -76, 160, -154, 236, -236 };
/* all the delta tables to choose from, at all 4 delta levels */
static const int16_t * const ydts[] = { ydt1, ydt2, ydt3, ydt4, NULL };
static const int16_t * const fat_ydts[] = { fat_ydt3, fat_ydt3, fat_ydt3, fat_ydt4, NULL };
static const int16_t * const cdts[] = { cdt1, cdt1, cdt2, cdt3, NULL };
-static const int16_t * const fat_cdts[] = { fat_cdt2, fat_cdt2, fat_cdt2, fat_cdt3, NULL };
+static const int16_t * const fat_cdts[] = { fat_cdt2, fat_cdt2, fat_cdt2, fat_ydt4, NULL };
static const uint8_t pc_tbl2[] = {
0x8,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,