On 22/06/10 16:04, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On 6/22/2010 7:45 AM, Tomas Frydrych wrote: >> On 22/06/10 15:22, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> >>> "Normal" applications are expected to just use the Qt Multimedia APIs to >>> play media, and not talk to gstreamer directly. >>> However, at the same time we realize that specialist type of >>> applications may want to have more finegrained and detailed control than >>> the Qt Multimedia API allows (which is somewhat of an abstraction after >>> all), so we have >>> to allow direct access to gstreamer as well, to not make really >>> interesting applications impossible. >>> >> Which kind of opens the whole question of what is the point providing an >> extra abstraction on the top of the GStreamer abstraction in the first >> place, does it not ? >> > > No it doesn't; if all you want to do is play some movie or sound, the Qt > Mobility is more than plenty.
That completely misses the point; what would be a sound engineering reason for using an extra abstraction, when the abstraction sits on yet another abstraction perfectly capable to handle the 'all you want to do is play some movie or sound' gracefully ? Abstractions are never free, they cost resources and functionality, and as such should be avoided when not needed. So, why are we needing an abstraction above GStreamer ? Tomas _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
