Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
On Fri, 16 Feb 2024, James Almer wrote:
On 2/16/2024 7:42 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, Anton Khirnov wrote:
Quoting Marton Balint (2024-02-13 21:27:34)
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, James Almer wrote:
On 2/12/2024 6:15 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
Signed-off-by: Marton Balint
---
libavutil/channel_layout.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavutil/channel_layout.h b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
index b8bff6f365..db0c005e87 100644
--- a/libavutil/channel_layout.h
+++ b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
@@ -146,6 +146,10 @@ enum AVChannelOrder {
* as defined in AmbiX format $ 2.1.
*/
AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_AMBISONIC,
+ /**
+ * Number of channel orders, not part of ABI/API
+ */
+ AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
};
Is it worth adding this to a public header just to limit a loop in a
test? A
loop that fwiw still depends on an array that needs to be updated with
more
names if you add new orders.
Several other enums also have this. So API consistency can be considered
a more important factor.
I'd be concerned that many callers don't undertand the implications of
"not part of the ABI".
Maybe we should rename all of them to FF_ prefix to make it more clear
callers should not use these?
I think this is a good idea. So is it OK to apply this if I change the
prefix to FF?
I wont oppose to it.
Ok, changed locally.
Will apply the series soon.
Regards,
Marton
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
On 2/16/2024 7:42 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, Anton Khirnov wrote:
Quoting Marton Balint (2024-02-13 21:27:34)
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, James Almer wrote:
On 2/12/2024 6:15 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
Signed-off-by: Marton Balint
---
libavutil/channel_layout.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavutil/channel_layout.h b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
index b8bff6f365..db0c005e87 100644
--- a/libavutil/channel_layout.h
+++ b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
@@ -146,6 +146,10 @@ enum AVChannelOrder {
* as defined in AmbiX format $ 2.1.
*/
AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_AMBISONIC,
+ /**
+ * Number of channel orders, not part of ABI/API
+ */
+ AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
};
Is it worth adding this to a public header just to limit a loop in a
test? A
loop that fwiw still depends on an array that needs to be updated
with more
names if you add new orders.
Several other enums also have this. So API consistency can be considered
a more important factor.
I'd be concerned that many callers don't undertand the implications of
"not part of the ABI".
Maybe we should rename all of them to FF_ prefix to make it more clear
callers should not use these?
I think this is a good idea. So is it OK to apply this if I change the
prefix to FF?
I wont oppose to it.
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
On Thu, 15 Feb 2024, Anton Khirnov wrote:
Quoting Marton Balint (2024-02-13 21:27:34)
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, James Almer wrote:
On 2/12/2024 6:15 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
Signed-off-by: Marton Balint
---
libavutil/channel_layout.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavutil/channel_layout.h b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
index b8bff6f365..db0c005e87 100644
--- a/libavutil/channel_layout.h
+++ b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
@@ -146,6 +146,10 @@ enum AVChannelOrder {
* as defined in AmbiX format $ 2.1.
*/
AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_AMBISONIC,
+/**
+ * Number of channel orders, not part of ABI/API
+ */
+AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
};
Is it worth adding this to a public header just to limit a loop in a test? A
loop that fwiw still depends on an array that needs to be updated with more
names if you add new orders.
Several other enums also have this. So API consistency can be considered
a more important factor.
I'd be concerned that many callers don't undertand the implications of
"not part of the ABI".
Maybe we should rename all of them to FF_ prefix to make it more clear
callers should not use these?
I think this is a good idea. So is it OK to apply this if I change the
prefix to FF?
Thanks,
Marton
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
Quoting Marton Balint (2024-02-13 21:27:34)
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, James Almer wrote:
>
> > On 2/12/2024 6:15 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
> >> Signed-off-by: Marton Balint
> >> ---
> >>libavutil/channel_layout.h | 4
> >>1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/libavutil/channel_layout.h b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
> >> index b8bff6f365..db0c005e87 100644
> >> --- a/libavutil/channel_layout.h
> >> +++ b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
> >> @@ -146,6 +146,10 @@ enum AVChannelOrder {
> >> * as defined in AmbiX format $ 2.1.
> >> */
> >>AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_AMBISONIC,
> >> +/**
> >> + * Number of channel orders, not part of ABI/API
> >> + */
> >> +AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
> >>};
> >
> > Is it worth adding this to a public header just to limit a loop in a test?
> > A
> > loop that fwiw still depends on an array that needs to be updated with more
> > names if you add new orders.
>
> Several other enums also have this. So API consistency can be considered
> a more important factor.
I'd be concerned that many callers don't undertand the implications of
"not part of the ABI".
Maybe we should rename all of them to FF_ prefix to make it more clear
callers should not use these?
--
Anton Khirnov
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
On Tue, 13 Feb 2024, James Almer wrote:
On 2/12/2024 6:15 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
Signed-off-by: Marton Balint
---
libavutil/channel_layout.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavutil/channel_layout.h b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
index b8bff6f365..db0c005e87 100644
--- a/libavutil/channel_layout.h
+++ b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
@@ -146,6 +146,10 @@ enum AVChannelOrder {
* as defined in AmbiX format $ 2.1.
*/
AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_AMBISONIC,
+/**
+ * Number of channel orders, not part of ABI/API
+ */
+AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
};
Is it worth adding this to a public header just to limit a loop in a test? A
loop that fwiw still depends on an array that needs to be updated with more
names if you add new orders.
Several other enums also have this. So API consistency can be considered
a more important factor.
IMO, just do FF_ARRAY_ELEMS(channel_order_names) in the test.
Then adding a new channel order would not show up as breakage in the
test. I have no strong preference though, and can change it if you
still want me to.
Regards,
Marton
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
On 2/12/2024 6:15 PM, Marton Balint wrote:
Signed-off-by: Marton Balint
---
libavutil/channel_layout.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavutil/channel_layout.h b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
index b8bff6f365..db0c005e87 100644
--- a/libavutil/channel_layout.h
+++ b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
@@ -146,6 +146,10 @@ enum AVChannelOrder {
* as defined in AmbiX format $ 2.1.
*/
AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_AMBISONIC,
+/**
+ * Number of channel orders, not part of ABI/API
+ */
+AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
};
Is it worth adding this to a public header just to limit a loop in a
test? A loop that fwiw still depends on an array that needs to be
updated with more names if you add new orders.
IMO, just do FF_ARRAY_ELEMS(channel_order_names) in the test.
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
Signed-off-by: Marton Balint
---
libavutil/channel_layout.h | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libavutil/channel_layout.h b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
index b8bff6f365..db0c005e87 100644
--- a/libavutil/channel_layout.h
+++ b/libavutil/channel_layout.h
@@ -146,6 +146,10 @@ enum AVChannelOrder {
* as defined in AmbiX format $ 2.1.
*/
AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_AMBISONIC,
+/**
+ * Number of channel orders, not part of ABI/API
+ */
+AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB
};
--
2.35.3
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
