On 15.09.2016 08:55, Josh de Kock wrote:
On 14/09/2016 23:44, Thomas Volkert wrote:
On 15.09.2016 00:27, Josh de Kock wrote:

Resending this set with ffplay now having two versions, a SDL2 and a
SDL1 version. I've integrated all comments up until now (hopefully).


Josh de Kock (3):
   lavd: Add SDL2 output device
   ffplay: make copy for SDL1
   MAINTAINERS: update my entries

Marton Balint (1):
   ffplay: add SDL2 support

  MAINTAINERS               |   4 +-
  Makefile                  |   1 +
  configure                 |  35 ++-
  ffplay.c                  | 599
  ffplay.c => ffplay_sdl1.c |   1 -

Maintaining two versions of ffplay sounds as too much overhead to me. Is
it not possible to add some more code abstraction or even some simple
#ifdef constructs to support SDL1 as well as SDL2 in only one ffplay
version in parallel?
So, the actually used SDL version could be selected during the configure
step. After some months, the (hopefully) deprecated SDL1 code could be

Yes, it is quite a bit of unnecessary overhead, but it's much cleaner than #ifdeffery in a single source file.

In general, I don't like the idea of having 2 source files with almost the same content. This usually indicates to me that the code structure could be improved. But ...you said you take over the maintenance which is needed. So, I am fine with this step as long as the old file gets dropped soon (in terms of months instead of years).
(And I also don't like a flood of #ifdefs. ;) )

Also, to change ffplay.c for most fixes as you'd have to reflect the change on either side of the #ifdefs, so you don't gain anything from not splitting the sources.

I agree for SDL related patches. This apparently has to be done for SDL1 as well as SDL2. However, for other patches you have to do copy+paste to get them in both ffplay source files.
But see above .. I am fine if you compensate this.

Best regards,
ffmpeg-devel mailing list

Reply via email to