[FFmpeg-devel] for ffmpeg org

C Chatterjee cchatterj at hotmail.com
Wed Feb 8 20:39:00 CET 2012

I am not asking anything - just commenting.
I am not saying go to C89. Intel compiler is C99.
The comment was that some folks want ffmpeg to run in VC++ and I have a subset of ffmpeg running in vc++.
Giving that out will not help because only my custom subset works. In order to make all of ffmpeg work that way we need to do some work on the inline assemblies and minor #ifdefs. I am unwilling to do this unless it is a team effort and there is wider interest. I am happy with what I have. Just trying to help.

If you guys are happy with what you have let's not worry about VC++.


> Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 11:44:11 -0700
> From: mbradshaw at sorensonmedia.com
> To: ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] for ffmpeg org
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:29 AM, C Chatterjee <cchatterj at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > It will be easier if we take up a community wide project to do a good job
> > of this. I can provide all my changes to start. This will distribute the
> > work load. The benefits are:
> > 1. Work on VC++ IDE - superior debug environment than GDB. I do not wish
> > to argue with anyone on this point.
> >
> Most of the FFmpeg devs develop on Linux, so there probably won't be a lot
> of motivation to port the code just to use Visual Studio.
> > 2. Run faster on intel machines with intel compiler. My guess is 10% speed
> > up on intel cpus.
> >
> FFmpeg can already be compiled with the Intel C compiler.
> What you're asking is to port the entire FFmpeg project to another language
> (or at least another standard of the same language).  That's quite an
> undertaking that would have many side effects.  If FFmpeg was ported to
> C89, then C99 features could not be used (which would be a huge negative).
>  If FFmpeg was ported to C++... well that'd be like starting from scratch,
> when the current solution works just fine.
> While I don't speak for the FFmpeg project, I personally think much better
> justification for porting the entire project is necessary.  Using Visual
> Studio just isn't a big enough plus to justify all the work and changes
> that would be necessary.  You are more than welcome to attempt this if you
> wish, but I seriously think you'll have a hard time convincing the
> community to join in your efforts without a large list of crucial benefits.
> Michael Bradshaw
> _______________________________________________
> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list