Le duodi 22 floréal, an CCXXIII, Clement Boesch a écrit : > > also the message may originate from a libavcodec used by another lib > > instead of the user application > > > > I think the average user would benefit from having the option dispayed > > with a exactly useable as is syntax > > I support this as well. No opinion on the API itself.
Theoretically, that is true. In practice, there are dozens of things that would benefit the user in this area. The most obvious one is of course: having the error message in their native tongue instead of English. There is a hard design problem in the error reporting mechanism. The issue that lead to this discussion is the tip of the iceberg. Not even that, is is just a tiny ice peak near the surface amongst dozens of similar and more pressing issues. We are only discussing it because someone had too much free time this week-end and decided to bikeshed Carl Eugen's wording. Attacking the issues one at a time and addressing them the quick-and-dirty way will only make it that much harder to overhaul the system cleanly. So the real question is: is the benefit worth the cost? The benefit here is: in a few fringe cases, avoid users who do not know it already to look in their application help system how to set a lavf option. Well, IMHO, no, the benefit is not worth the cost. Not by far. Of course, if someone comes up with an idea that really enhances the error reporting system that would, as a side effect, fix this negligible issue, I would wholeheartedly support it. But I am sorry to say that despite all my efforts, I have still not come up with a satisfactory solution for error reporting. Regards, -- Nicola George
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
