[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] api-example for libavfilter
Wed Dec 8 20:37:44 CET 2010
L'octidi 18 frimaire, an CCXIX, Stefano Sabatini a ?crit?:
> > +#include <stdio.h>
> > +#include <stdlib.h>
> > +#include <string.h>
> > +#include <unistd.h>
> These headers shouldn't be required.
string.h was forgotten from a previous version.
unistd.h is necessary for usleep, compilation breaks without it.
stdio.h and stdlib.h are indirectly included by libav* headers, but AFAIK,
that fact is not explicitly stated, and that could possibly change.
> I'd prefer to avoid to rely on other FFmpeg libraries, currently lavfi
> only depends on libavutil, libavcore and libswscale, and API example
> should be minimal so should be as strict as possible in terms of
I think that illustrating how the filtering system interacts with the rest
of the libraries is important: which time base should be used, how to insert
an AVFrame in the system, etc.
See libavformat/output-example.c: to give a complete working example, before
outputing with libavformat, it scales with libswscale and encodes with
> Also the code could be simpler if you implement it this
> way... implement a video sink
This is a point that I wanted clarified when I started writing this program:
it seems that anyone who wants to use libavfilter is almost expected to
write its own designated sink.
Is it on purpose?
Should there not be some kind of "buffer" sink just like there is a "buffer"
> for printing to console a textual
> representation of the image (which could be useful even in
Agreed, I will try to submit something like that sometime.
But that will not do for an example, because an example needs to show how
the main program is supposed to get the filtered data back from libavfilter.
> and let the user specify the input for the input source
> in the filtergraph description.
As above: an API example needs to illustrate how the main program is
supposed to inject the video/audio it has into libavfilter.
(And at this time, video sources are rather scarce.)
> you can use the log system (with the fancy coloring support).
I think that a simple fprintf is more readable for this case.
Anyway, I temporarily withdraw my patch: I forgot all cleanup code. I will
submit again when it is done. But in the meantime, I am interested in
clarifications on the previous points, especially the question of the sink.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel