[FFmpeg-devel] Proposal on clearly delineating nonC99 code in FFmpeg
Sun Jul 8 00:57:51 CEST 2007
Roman Shaposhnik <rvs at sun.com> writes:
> On Sat, 2007-07-07 at 23:20 +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> Crafting a test that really determines whether something works is
>> often less than trivial. What appears to work in a simple test case
>> may well fail in obscure ways when used in real code. This
>> notwithstanding, testing whether the constructs in question compile OK
>> is certainly better than only testing a preprocessor definition.
> Seems like we are in agreement (although I'm waiting for Michael
> to chime in). Speaking of patches I would like to commit it in
> two phases:
> 1. create a header file but still have everything in it be based
> on #ifdef __GNUC__ and such
> 2. update ./configure and the header file
Sounds like a plan. I'd even suggest changing one feature at a time
so accidental breakage is easier to isolate, as usual.
There is one problem with having configure test for features: it won't
work for features we want to use in a public header. Hopefully those
can be kept to a minimum though. Things like alignment specifiers
certainly do not belong there.
mans at mansr.com
More information about the ffmpeg-devel