no paddings were necessary in the case of bit32 #17
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
The order of colors was wrong in the case of bit32. |
|
I agree with the wrong order of the colors in case of 32 bit. If the padding is not necessary... well i dont know. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi. Thank you for your nice library.
I got RangeError when I decoded 32bit BMP with a width that is not a multiple of 4.
I think that no paddings are necessary in the case of bit32 decoder since the specification of BMP requires just a multiple of 4 bytes per row, does not requires a multiple of 4 pixels per row.