On Fri, 27 Oct 2017 12:37:18 +0100 Mark Thompson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Can you suggest the sort of names you're thinking of here? I think this > >> might depend on (3) as well to be useful. > > > > I was thinking maybe "hwaccel_vaapi" etc. > > I feel like this sort of name is trivially generated from the other contents > of the structure, so coding it here wouldn't really add anything? > > Also, if explicit names were added to the public API then people might try to > use them for non-informational purposes. I considered using them for non-informational purposes. I guess if anyone wants them, they could probably generate the names. My worry was just that if you did that, the existing flags might not be enough to disambiguate that in a useless way. Also the API could add new fields that the API user would have to know about to disambiguate (for example all but a new field could have the same values). Anyway, let's just not have a name, bikeshed closed. _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
