Quoting wm4 (2017-02-08 12:08:18)
> On Wed,  8 Feb 2017 11:50:58 +0100
> Anton Khirnov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > This will avoid every caller from hardcoding some specific alignment,
> > which may break in the future with new instruction sets.
> > ---
> 
> >   * @param frame frame in which to store the new buffers.
> > - * @param align required buffer size alignment
> > + * @param align Required buffer size alignment. If equal to 0, alignment 
> > will be
> > + *              chosen automatically for the current CPU. It is highly
> > + *              recommended to pass 0 here unless you know what you are 
> > doing.
> >   *
> >   * @return 0 on success, a negative AVERROR on error.
> >   */
> 
> This implicitly changes the meaning of "0" from no alignment
> (equivalent to 1) to some random alignment. I don't think that's very
> safe. Why not make -1 the magic value that enables automatic alignment?

0 is not "no alignment", 0 is invalid for video and I think will do
something random right now. For audio, 0 already means automatic. So I'm
not changing the behaviour of any valid code.

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

Reply via email to