On Sun, Dec 25, 2016 at 11:44:07AM +0100, Nicolas George wrote: > Le quintidi 5 nivôse, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit : > > Whats your oppinion on using a explicit av_assert1() in the calling > > code for this ? (i assume it can be done easily&cleanly) > > > > It would explicitly in C code say what is meant, while a > > "_sure" requires additional knowledge specific to lavfi > > You mean, in the caller, instead of: > > ret = ff_link_consume_frame_sure(link, &frame); > > write: > > ret = ff_link_consume_frame(link, &frame); > av_assert1(ret >= 0);
yes, something like that (or a av_assert1(ret != AVERROR_OUT_OF_FUEL) > > Well, it loses us the property that ff_link_consume_frame_sure() cannot > fail at all (ff_link_consume_samples_sure() can, because it allocates > memory) and thus do not require getting the return value at all. But I > was not sure I wanted to make this a promise anyway. > > Also, it adds extra tests: one in the code, one in consume() instead of > just one in the code (not counting the asserts, only present in debug > builds). But that is just my premature optimizer side talking. its premature too but if we have expensive checks we could cache the result in the link [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Dictatorship: All citizens are under surveillance, all their steps and actions recorded, for the politicians to enforce control. Democracy: All politicians are under surveillance, all their steps and actions recorded, for the citizens to enforce control.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel