Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-05 Thread Paul B Mahol
On Fri, Jul 5, 2024 at 10:09 PM Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 04:44:39PM +0200, Paul B Mahol wrote: > > The AVOptions state is extremely ugly. > > > > It is insane to request from library users to convert non-strings option > > values from/to strings to be able to read/chan

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-05 Thread Michael Niedermayer
On Thu, Jul 04, 2024 at 04:44:39PM +0200, Paul B Mahol wrote: > The AVOptions state is extremely ugly. > > It is insane to request from library users to convert non-strings option > values from/to strings to be able to read/change them, it is ugly, > inefficient, and slow. This becomes more releva

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Paul B Mahol
On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 10:12 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > > Superior only for you, no GUI users use text widgets for non-text. > > Users prefer an application that works now, even if its with a text > widget, to an application that does not work now and might work when

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Nicolas George
Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > Superior only for you, no GUI users use text widgets for non-text. Users prefer an application that works now, even if its with a text widget, to an application that does not work now and might work when updated. This is getting nowhere, so end of this for me. --

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Paul B Mahol
On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 9:49 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > > Application vendor will issue new free-update with handling for newly > > introduced AVOption type. > > So you mean your users have tu update your application to have it handle > new types in more recent FFmpeg

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Nicolas George
Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > Application vendor will issue new free-update with handling for newly > introduced AVOption type. So you mean your users have tu update your application to have it handle new types in more recent FFmpeg? How do they do if you moved to another project and do not updat

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Paul B Mahol
On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 9:33 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > > Nobody sane uses text manipulation in GUIs. > > Then how would you do it? > > } else if (opt->type == AV_OPT_TYPE_COLOR) { > create_color_picker_widget(opt); > } else if (opt->ty

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Nicolas George
Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > Nobody sane uses text manipulation in GUIs. Then how would you do it? } else if (opt->type == AV_OPT_TYPE_COLOR) { create_color_picker_widget(opt); } else if (opt->type == AV_OPT_TYPE_DATE) { create_calendar_widget(opt)

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Paul B Mahol
On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 8:34 PM Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > > Modern humanoids use GUI interfaces and there text interface is reserved > > only for actual text - STRING AVOptions and some aliases for other > > AVOptions types. > > GUI can only exist for types that are kno

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Nicolas George
Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > Modern humanoids use GUI interfaces and there text interface is reserved > only for actual text - STRING AVOptions and some aliases for other > AVOptions types. GUI can only exist for types that are known by the application or the GUI toolkit it uses. If you are using

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Paul B Mahol
> NG reply: > > Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > > The AVOptions state is extremely ugly. > > > > It is insane to request from library users to convert non-strings option > > values from/to strings to be able to read/change them, it is ugly, > > inefficient, and slow. This becomes more relevant for re

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Nicolas George
Paul B Mahol (12024-07-04): > The AVOptions state is extremely ugly. > > It is insane to request from library users to convert non-strings option > values from/to strings to be able to read/change them, it is ugly, > inefficient, and slow. This becomes more relevant for recent array options > exte

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread Paul B Mahol
On Thu, Jul 4, 2024 at 4:54 PM James Almer wrote: > On 7/4/2024 11:44 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote: > > The AVOptions state is extremely ugly. > > > > It is insane to request from library users to convert non-strings option > > values from/to strings to be able to read/change them, it is ugly, > > av_o

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] Sorry state of AVOptions

2024-07-04 Thread James Almer
On 7/4/2024 11:44 AM, Paul B Mahol wrote: The AVOptions state is extremely ugly. It is insane to request from library users to convert non-strings option values from/to strings to be able to read/change them, it is ugly, av_opt_{get,set,eval}_{int,double,etc}? inefficient, and slow. This bec