Howdy guys. Sorry for the crosspost. Patch to speed up taglib.

Scott Wheeler wheeler at
Fri Oct 12 19:16:31 CEST 2007

Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) wrote:
> But it would definitely have caught the bug that rendered FLAC files 
> unplayable, wouldn't it?
> And if the TagLib test suite was bigger than TagLib, so what?
> Honest, guys, honest.  I've had JuK in the past eat my MP3s for breakfast, and 
> actually figuring out what happened when your tracks are royally screwed is a 
> matter only to be coped with a bottle of tequila and a CD player playing sad 
> songs.
> A long journey begins with a step in the right direction.

Uhm, and an unrealistic example begins with ... uhm, ok, this is getting 

Here's a list of things which aren't in tune with reality:

- Me writing a big test suite.  Seriously, I've been having trouble 
finding time to review patches.  Me writing a test suite larger than 
TagLib just isn't going to happen.

- No, a test suite wouldn't have caught the FLAC example because it was 
just a missing padding byte.  The toolkit was working just fine, but the 
spec (which isn't really a spec in the case of FLAC) wasn't follwed 
exactly.  Someone had to play the file to realize that it was broken.

- JuK ate your MP3s.  Amarok ate MP3s for a while, but that wasn't 
really related to TagLib.  MP3s are the format that tends to not get 
eaten since there's no container to break.


More information about the taglib-devel mailing list