On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 01:59:18PM +0800, Jun Zhao wrote: > > > On 2017/12/7 8:49, Jun Zhao wrote: > > > > On 2017/12/5 17:25, Hendrik Leppkes wrote: > >> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 6:42 AM, Jun Zhao <mypopy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> On 2017/12/5 2:32, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > >>>> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 11:07:11AM +0100, Hendrik Leppkes wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Moritz Barsnick <barsn...@gmx.net> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 13:02:20 +0800, Jun Zhao wrote: > >>>>>>> Use perdefined micro __FUNCTION__ rather than hard coding function > >>>>>>> name > >>>>>>> to fix wrong function name in error message. > >>>>>> AFAICT, "__FUNCTION__" is a C99 feature and thereby not supported by > >>>>>> ffmpeg style. Or should it be? (It might be "supported by all compilers > >>>>>> we care about".) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://ffmpeg.org/developer.html#C-language-features > >>>>>> > >>>>> __FUNCTION__ is not C99, its a compiler extension (which is understood > >>>>> by GCC and some other compilers). __func__ is the C99 keyword. > >>>>> Its likely that not all compilers we currently support would have > >>>>> __func__, if they all have __FUNCTION__ however I cannot tell. > >>>> There are some matches for __FUNCTION__ in git, so i wonder if all > >>>> compilers we support do support it > >>> So now we have 2 option: > >>> > >>> 1). Find a ways to get the current function on different platforms in > >>> C90, > >>> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7008485/func-or-function-or-manual-const-char-id > >>> have some information for this way. （lot of #if defined ） > >>> 2). Just remove __FUNCTION__ from the code. Total 5 __FUNCTION__ in > >>> source code when grep the code. > >>> > >>> Personally, I prefer option 2 than option 1， any comments? > >> If __FUNCTION__ is already in use right now (and hence supported by > >> all compilers we have), it should be fine to use it again, so no need > >> for complex ifdefs, I would think. > >> In fact I just checked, and its in use in a key part in avformat, not > >> even an optional module, so any compiler not supporting it would > >> already fail building it now. > >> > >> - Hendrik > > I agree, so we need to wait more comments for this ? > > Any comments, Michael ? or we need to remove all __FUNCTION__ from the > code ?
ill apply the patch as it seems all concerns have been resolved IIUC thx [...] -- Michael GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB Never trust a computer, one day, it may think you are the virus. -- Compn
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
