Re: bug-to-bug compatibility - another issue

On 2/22/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Definitely not only. But when one place in the spec contradicts to another
> one (like in your first example) we should follow RI.

Actually, I don't see real contradiction... In the class description
(you posted) the idea is that flush() should be called at the end to
allow decoder to flush its internal info. The provided steps is a
description of the overall decoder usage, further detalization is in
the methods spec... The idea of that description is to show that the
flush is required at the end, no more... That is my interpretation, at
least.

--
Anton Avtamonov,
Intel Middleware Products Division