Quoting Luca Barbato (2015-10-18 00:22:51)
> On 16/10/15 19:49, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > Quoting Luca Barbato (2015-10-16 06:04:03)
> >> Use the `avio_` namespace as per all the other functions using an
> >> AVIOContext.
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Since we are at it... (version not bumped on purpose)
> >
> > ...what? What is the point here beyond breaking API for no apparent
> > reason.
> >
>
> Having a regular API it is easier to lookup functions and the life of
> those that write bindings gets much easier.
>
> Since anyway avpacket is getting overhauled it is a good time to make
> also this change, I noticed it since the regular expressions I'm using
> to hunt avpacket usage spotted those as well.
>
> For those that are not aware, libclang makes creating automatic bindings
> in a quite simple way as long the API matches some generic rules, e.g.:
>
> AVIOContext -> avio
> avio_${action}(AVIOContext *c, ...) -> avio.action(...)
>
> In this specific case:
>
> avio.get_packet(packet)
> avio.append_packet(packet)
>
> would get automagically generated together with the read()/write()
> functions instead of having to make yet another exception.
>
> Quite handy once every function is made fit correctly.
I do not think that this is a sufficient reason to break API, especially
since any such bindings are at this point mythological creatures.
--
Anton Khirnov
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
