On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 09:52:08PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > On 12/10/2016 9:23 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 08:31:57PM -0300, James Almer wrote: > >> On 12/10/2016 7:01 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote: [...]
> > And also theres more work for us to maintain seperate implementations > > for the options, all code accessing them has to deal with them being > > in different places, making all related backports harder. > > > > To me that looks like a disadvantage from every side > > > > I think the real solution is to start liking AVOptions, they make > > our work easier. > > AVOptions are fine. Private-but-not-really and no-direct-access fields > in public structs are what's kinda ugly an unpopular. a slightly off topic question but if people care about these existing "no direct access" fields why do they not change them ? its a bit reading and thinking and droping the "no direct access" comments, this is not much work It requires a tiny bit of care so that future added fields dont do bad things and we should document that past releases still in some cases need the indirect access ... just seems a bit odd to me in relation to the opposition to add such a field were its needed for a bugfix but total apparent lack of interrest in removing such "no direct access" restrctions where there is no reason at all to keep them [...] -- 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
