On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 08:09:01PM +0100, Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> On Sunday, February 16, 2014, Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 06:40:57PM +0100, Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> > > --- a/libavfilter/vf_interlace.c
> > > +++ b/libavfilter/vf_interlace.c
> > > @@ -44,7 +44,9 @@ enum FieldType {
> > >  typedef struct {
> > >      const AVClass *class;
> > >      enum ScanMode scan;    // top or bottom field first scanning
> > > +#if LIBAVFILTER_VERSION_MAJOR < 5
> > >      int lowpass;           // enable or disable low pass filterning
> > > +#endif
> > >      AVFrame *cur, *next;   // the two frames from which the new one is
> > obtained
> >
> > No, this is not how deprecation should be done.  Instead, add a new
> > FF_API_FOO definition to libavfilter/version.h and test for that.
> >
> 
> The deprecation here is slightly different than usual, this is all
> contained in a single file, so no need to taint the headers, no?

Yes, but I would still add FF_API_FOO.  I see no need to use a custom
method for this case.  You were missing a version.h include anyway.

Diego
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to