[asterisk-users] Use the NEW ulaw/alaw codecs (slower, but cleaner)

[Wilton Helm]

I'm a bit puzzled, also, having implemented ulaw and alaw in an embedded application.  Each can be done with a 16 Kbyte table in about 0 time with no errors.  There are probably tricks that will cut the table down by 2 or 4 X for a small cost in CPU cycles.  The inverse requires 256 16 bit words.  I thought ulaw and alaw were pretty much no brainers.  I don't know of any gottchas.  Why anyone with more that a few K bytes of total system memory would even consider anything other than a lookup table is beyond me.

Wilton
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20081111/02b83977/attachment.htm