Luca Barbato wrote:
On 09/01/13 17:28, Vladimir Pantelic wrote:
Luca Barbato wrote:
????:
// those are very lavc-specific, but quite useful so i'm unsure
// what to do about them. pkt_pts might potentially be
replaced by pts,
// since pts is currently not used for anything useful when
decoding
// but pkt_dts is apparently also useful when there is no pts
int64_t pkt_pts;
int64_t pkt_dts;
int64_t reordered_opaque;
I wonder who uses reordered_opaque, the other two have some uses indeed.
I am using it. And I still find it useful to have a way to attach a user
provided
reference to a frame.
Are you happy with it? should we replace with an union type that can fit
a pointer, a large int and a double?
I'm happy with an opaque 64bit, but would not oppose a union.
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
