On Sun, 18 Oct 2015, Bodecs Bela wrote:
[...]
It can be anything if it does not change existing behaviour, a complex
specifier can be split to basic specifiers without worrying about the
syntax of the basic specifier and if there is a well defined rule for
escaping special characters. Also if it is readable to the user, that
is a plus.
The exact solution can be a bit about personal taste as well, but
maybe something like
(specifier)(specifier)
I like this version. So, there would be the original case: specifier,
and if you want to use more specifier, you should put each of them into
parenthesis (round brackets): (specifier)(specifier)
I think it really won't break any current code
Yes, exactly.
+specifier+specifier
I think () is more readible and rarely used in specifiers. If it is ok
for you and others I would implement it.
Ok, it's fine by me.
Thanks,
Marton
can work and is readable. Knowing that you are dealing with a complex
expression also means that the special characters separating the basic
specifiers needs escaping, I guess av_get_token can be used to get the
proper unescaped basic specifiers when parsing the complex one.
Regards,
Marton
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
best regards,
bb
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
