Anton Khirnov (12021-01-01): > I do not think this is a good idea. There are enough event loops in the > world and making yet another one is not in scope for us. What we should > do instead is allow clean integration with existing event loops, mainly > by exporting the underlying file descriptors so they can be poll()ed on.
We must do that indeed, but that is not enough, you are missing part of the problem: FFmpeg has complex protocols that rely on several sockets, and that is 100% part of the scope. Currently, these protocols are implemented with an unsavory mix of polling and short timeouts. To fix them and make them properly usable, we need an event loop. So, we have only two choices (I consider "leaving everything in the mess it is" is not a choice): implement our own event loop or choose one as a mandatory requirement. AFAIK, adding new mandatory requirements is not the preferred policy. Regards, -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
