[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavf/tee: add support for bitstream filtering
nicolas.george at normalesup.org
Thu Jul 18 14:47:19 CEST 2013
Le decadi 30 messidor, an CCXXI, Stefano Sabatini a écrit :
> What do you suggest instead? fctx? I personally hate the confusion
> between object/object context, but not that I mind so much (especially
> if the code is authored by someone else than me).
Since contexts are used much more widely, I believe they should get the
shorter name, especially when there is absolutely no risk of confusion.
In this particular case, "mux" or "muxer" seems a nice name for the
AVFormatContext, and "filters" maybe for the bitstream filters.
> Yes, but...
> this leads to the namespace problem which was never properly handled,
> if we had a bsf option to any muxer then it will shadow the option.
I am still not convinced this issue is really a problem, options are few, it
is easy to be careful.
But you can just use the name "tee.bsf", since the dot was precisely
reserved for that use.
> My idea was indeed:
> Since we currently don't support bsf options in ffmpeg, I didn't
> bother to support them here.
That is right. In fact, I was convinced that av_bitstream_filter_init()
would split the name at the equal sign, but I was wrong. But the other
arguments to use the existing options system still stand.
> Sure, I'm aware of the problem. On the other hand I need a solution in
> the short term, and under these conditions I prefer the proverbial egg
> today rather than a chicken tomorrow, especially considering that a
> proper design/discussion/implementation would probably require
> weeks/months rather than days.
Of course, that is why I do not object to the patch.
> You're welcome to share your thougths about the lavfi data path.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
More information about the ffmpeg-devel