On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 10:39:36AM +0100, Nicolas George wrote: > Le decadi 20 ventôse, an CCXXIV, Clement Boesch a écrit : > > That's a good idea but downstream developers might prefer their users to > > experience a memleak that random violent aborts. I would probably make it > > at assert level 1. > > Assert level 0 and 1 are equivalent from an API point of view: they both > mean (in this case when testing value provided by the caller) that the > provided value is invalid on pain of undefined behaviour. > > On the other hand, this was not currently true nor documented: using these > functions with a destination that contains garbage is not illegal according > with doxy and works currently well. Thing is, currently, users can not have > a frame with garbage unless they do it on purpose: either it contains valid > pointers or it is cleared. >
> At the very least, this change would require updating the doxy accordingly. wm4 posted a patch to document the undefied-ness of this 0301 19:21 wm4 (2.4K) ├─>[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/6] lavu: improve documentation of some AVFrame functions is that sufficient, or should further documentation be added ? [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty. -- Plato
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
