John Cox (12019-05-16): > >> - if (!ctx) > >> + if (!ctx || !(*ctx)) > >That would protect somebody stupid enough to call av_tx_uninit(NULL) > >instead of av_tx_uninit(&var). A hard crass is completely warranted in > >this case. An assert would be acceptable. > Actually that is what the original code does. What you appear to want > is > > if (!*ctx)
Indeed. It is for example what avfilter_link_free(), av_bsf_list_free(), etc., do. It correspond to a useful programming pattern. The current code is clearly a mistake. Regards, -- Nicolas George
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
