On 19/11/14 07:22, Vittorio Giovara wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Vittorio Giovara
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On 18/11/14 09:16, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 18/11/14 00:57, Kieran Kunhya wrote:
>>>>>>> I added ff_combine_packet since it reduces the number of lines
>>>>>>> and makes the code slightly less verbose.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is very confusing since ff_combine_packet suggests an AVPacket is
>>>>> involved.
>>>>>
>>>>> It will and it is not less confusing that using "frame" since it is a
>>>>> frame-worth-packet what you get out of this machinery anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> But since you are introducing new API, an argument like "the old API also
>>>> was confusing, so this one might as well be" is really not something you
>>>> should be using. ;)
>>>> Dispense with the confusion in the new API!
>>>
>>> It is *less* confusing, that's the whole point.
>>
>> Since this is just a name replacement, can anyone suggest a better
>> name for both functions?
>
> On IRC we were suggested ff_try_combine_frame(), does this name appeal
> to everyone?
> If so, I'll start queueing the cosmetics first and then resend the
> renamed patches.
>
No, it is wrong.
To reinstate here:
What we are doing is collate data fragment that might be scattered
across multiple packets and will end in a single packet containing an
amount of data that could be fed to the decoder and would get back a
full decoded frame (ignoring B-frames and friends).
The function has two failure paths, one fatal (no memory) and one non
fatal (no enough data to make a whole packet).
We have two variants to reduce the amount of boilerplate code.
So the name (for a pair of internal symbols) could follow the
ff_ + ${action} + _ + ${object}
**action** can be anything among `combine`, `collate` and such
**object** can be `data`, `data_packet` or `packet_data` and so forth
There is no `try`. The second variant can use the `2` suffix.
I'm delighted for the strive to perfection shown here btw.
lu
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
