Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-02-04 Thread Andreas Rheinhardt
Nicolas George: > Andreas Rheinhardt (12023-02-01): >> "One special guarantee is made in order to simplify the use of unions: >> if a union contains several structures that share a common initial >> sequence (see below), and if the union object currently contains one of >> these structures, it is

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-02-04 Thread Uoti Urpala
On Fri, 2023-02-03 at 15:45 +0100, Nicolas George wrote: > Andreas Rheinhardt (12023-02-01): > > "One special guarantee is made in order to simplify the use of unions: > > if a union contains several structures that share a common initial > > sequence (see below), and if the union object currently

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-02-03 Thread Nicolas George
Andreas Rheinhardt (12023-02-01): > "One special guarantee is made in order to simplify the use of unions: > if a union contains several structures that share a common initial > sequence (see below), and if the union object currently contains one of > these structures, it is permitted to inspect

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-02-01 Thread Andreas Rheinhardt
Nicolas George: > Andreas Rheinhardt (12023-02-01): >> PS: Upon rethinking, it is not only b) that contains undefined >> behaviour; it is b)-d) as well as the current code. The reason is that >> the type of AVFilterLink as seen in the files with FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS is >> not compatible with the

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Nicolas George
Andreas Rheinhardt (12023-02-01): > PS: Upon rethinking, it is not only b) that contains undefined > behaviour; it is b)-d) as well as the current code. The reason is that > the type of AVFilterLink as seen in the files with FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS is > not compatible with the type of AVFilterLink from

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Andreas Rheinhardt
Nicolas George: > Andreas Rheinhardt (12023-01-31): >> Details please. > > I was not going to spend time explaining unless I had assurance it was > because the issue of requiring changes in the internal implementation > and developers habits just to hide some fields was taken into account. >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Nicolas George
Andreas Rheinhardt (12023-01-31): > Details please. I was not going to spend time explaining unless I had assurance it was because the issue of requiring changes in the internal implementation and developers habits just to hide some fields was taken into account. Coming from somebody else, I

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Andreas Rheinhardt
Nicolas George: > Nicolas George (12023-01-31): >>> * it prevents filterlink internals from being visible in a >>> public header, where they have no business being >>> * it is a step towards hiding more of lavfi internals from public >>> headers >>> * the same pattern is already and ever more

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Nicolas George
Nicolas George (12023-01-31): > > * it prevents filterlink internals from being visible in a > > public header, where they have no business being > > * it is a step towards hiding more of lavfi internals from public > > headers > > * the same pattern is already and ever more widely used in the

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Nicolas George
Anton Khirnov (12023-01-31): > I still see no objective facts supporting your claim of exclusive > maintainership over the entirety of lavfi generic code and public API. The fact is very simple: I am the only one who understand how this code works. > So to avoid any further pointless bickering,

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Anton Khirnov
Quoting Nicolas George (2023-01-31 15:31:44) > Anton Khirnov (12023-01-31): > > Do you? > > > > You keep implying in your emails that you are the authority on lavfi, > > but I see no objective support for this claim. MAINTAINERS only lists > > you as the maintainer for graphdump.c and two

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 1/31/23, Nicolas George wrote: > Paul B Mahol (12023-01-31): >> No, you do not. Calling your libavfilter framework code "complex" is >> disgrace >> to really complex code in non-framework part of libavfilter or else in >> FFmpeg libraries. >> >> libavfilter framework needs serious overhaul. >>

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Nicolas George
Paul B Mahol (12023-01-31): > No, you do not. Calling your libavfilter framework code "complex" is disgrace > to really complex code in non-framework part of libavfilter or else in > FFmpeg libraries. > > libavfilter framework needs serious overhaul. > It have numerous limitations and other stuff

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Nicolas George
Anton Khirnov (12023-01-31): > Do you? > > You keep implying in your emails that you are the authority on lavfi, > but I see no objective support for this claim. MAINTAINERS only lists > you as the maintainer for graphdump.c and two filters. > And taken e.g. by the number of commits touching

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Anton Khirnov
Quoting Nicolas George (2023-01-31 15:03:34) > Anton Khirnov (12023-01-31): > > I find this a significant improvement in code quality, making it easier > > to maintain. > > You can say that, you do not maintain it. Do you? You keep implying in your emails that you are the authority on lavfi,

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 1/31/23, Nicolas George wrote: > Anton Khirnov (12023-01-31): >> I find this a significant improvement in code quality, making it easier >> to maintain. > > You can say that, you do not maintain it. > >> Making it obvious which field is private and which is public is a >> feature, not a bug. >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Nicolas George
Anton Khirnov (12023-01-31): > I find this a significant improvement in code quality, making it easier > to maintain. You can say that, you do not maintain it. > Making it obvious which field is private and which is public is a > feature, not a bug. Then I do not want this feature. Making

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-31 Thread Anton Khirnov
Quoting Nicolas George (2023-01-30 13:40:06) > Anton Khirnov (12023-01-30): > > This hack is used to limit the visibility of some AVFilterLink fields to > > only certain files. Replace it with the same pattern that is used e.g. > > in lavf AVStream/FFstream and avoid exposing these internal fields

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-30 Thread Nicolas George
Anton Khirnov (12023-01-30): > This hack is used to limit the visibility of some AVFilterLink fields to > only certain files. Replace it with the same pattern that is used e.g. > in lavf AVStream/FFstream and avoid exposing these internal fields in a > public header completely. > --- >

Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-30 Thread Paul B Mahol
On 1/30/23, Anton Khirnov wrote: > This hack is used to limit the visibility of some AVFilterLink fields to > only certain files. Replace it with the same pattern that is used e.g. > in lavf AVStream/FFstream and avoid exposing these internal fields in a > public header completely. Looks fine on

[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] lavfi: get rid of FF_INTERNAL_FIELDS

2023-01-30 Thread Anton Khirnov
This hack is used to limit the visibility of some AVFilterLink fields to only certain files. Replace it with the same pattern that is used e.g. in lavf AVStream/FFstream and avoid exposing these internal fields in a public header completely. --- libavfilter/avfilter.c | 191