On Sat, Dec 09, 2017 at 09:46:53PM +0100, Marton Balint wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
>
> >On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 12:09:35PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> >>On 11/21/2017 6:48 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>On Thu, 9 Nov 2017, James Cowgill wrote:
> >>>
>
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 12:09:35PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
On 11/21/2017 6:48 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
On Thu, 9 Nov 2017, James Cowgill wrote:
Hi,
On 09/11/17 14:02, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, James Cowgill
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 12:09:35PM -0300, James Almer wrote:
> On 11/21/2017 6:48 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 9 Nov 2017, James Cowgill wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 09/11/17 14:02, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, James Cowgill
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
Marton Balint (2017-11-26):
> Okay, I am exagarating a bit, but unconditionally returning AVERROR(ENOSYS)
> would be an even better incentive, no? :)
For invalid uses of the API that can be easily avoided by the
application (like not explicitly passing NULL to a function), a hard
crash is even bet
On Sun, 26 Nov 2017, James Almer wrote:
On 11/26/2017 12:19 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
James Almer (2017-11-26):
The old decode API is not scheduled for removal right now probably
because 99% of decoders need to be ported.
I think this statement contains some confusion that is harmful to th
On 11/26/2017 12:19 PM, Nicolas George wrote:
> James Almer (2017-11-26):
>> The old decode API is not scheduled for removal right now probably
>> because 99% of decoders need to be ported.
>
> I think this statement contains some confusion that is harmful to the
> discussion.
>
> There are two i
James Almer (2017-11-26):
> The old decode API is not scheduled for removal right now probably
> because 99% of decoders need to be ported.
I think this statement contains some confusion that is harmful to the
discussion.
There are two interfaces worth considering in this discussion: the
applicat
On 11/21/2017 6:48 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Nov 2017, James Cowgill wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 09/11/17 14:02, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, James Cowgill
>>> wrote:
In commit 061a0c14bb57 ("decode: restructure the core decoding
code"), the
>
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 10:48:19PM +0100, Marton Balint wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Nov 2017, James Cowgill wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >On 09/11/17 14:02, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> >>On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, James Cowgill wrote:
> >>>In commit 061a0c14bb57 ("decode: restructure the core decoding co
On Thu, 9 Nov 2017, James Cowgill wrote:
Hi,
On 09/11/17 14:02, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, James Cowgill wrote:
In commit 061a0c14bb57 ("decode: restructure the core decoding code"), the
deprecated avcodec_decode_* APIs were reworked so that they called into the
Hi,
On 09/11/17 14:02, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, James Cowgill wrote:
>> In commit 061a0c14bb57 ("decode: restructure the core decoding code"), the
>> deprecated avcodec_decode_* APIs were reworked so that they called into the
>> new avcodec_send_packet / avcodec_re
Le nonidi 19 brumaire, an CCXXVI, Derek Buitenhuis a écrit :
> Is it more sensible to actually return an error here? Otherwise it's just
> enabling
> future incorrect code; API users tend to ignore stderr warnings. I guess an
> argument
> could be made both ways.
Actually, if the use of the API
On 11/9/2017 12:21 PM, James Cowgill wrote:
> +if (avci->draining_done && pkt && pkt->size != 0) {
> +av_log(avctx, AV_LOG_WARNING, "Got unexpected packet after EOF\n");
> +avcodec_flush_buffers(avctx);
> +}
Is it more sensible to actually return an error here? Otherwise it
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 1:21 PM, James Cowgill wrote:
> In commit 061a0c14bb57 ("decode: restructure the core decoding code"), the
> deprecated avcodec_decode_* APIs were reworked so that they called into the
> new avcodec_send_packet / avcodec_receive_frame API. This had the side effect
> of prohi
In commit 061a0c14bb57 ("decode: restructure the core decoding code"), the
deprecated avcodec_decode_* APIs were reworked so that they called into the
new avcodec_send_packet / avcodec_receive_frame API. This had the side effect
of prohibiting sending new packets containing data after a drain
packe
15 matches
Mail list logo