Quoting Hendrik Leppkes (2016-05-01 01:02:56)
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Alexandra Hájková
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> - Shortening the function names (s/bitstream_/bs_/ ? 
> >> bitstream_"tell"_size?)
> >
> > I disagree with this, my intention was to follow the naming
> > conventions and to be consistent
> > with bytestream.h. Anyway what are the short names good for? When you
> > see bytestream_peek
> > or bitstream_peek, it's clear what's going on whereas "bs" might be 
> > confusing.
> 
> Its also obvious to me whats going on when I see get_bits, show_bits
> and skip_bits, and those are significantly shorter - and well known
> and established amongst the avcodec developers.
> Just food for thought. Change for the sake of change is not
> necessarily a good thing. These functions are imho clearly named
> enough to just keep their naming scheme.
> 

I always found the 'show_bits' name to be non-descriptive and just dumb
 -- in what way does it "show" the bits?

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

Reply via email to