[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 1/3] lavu/opt: document underlying C types for enum AVOptionType

[Anton Khirnov]

Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-08-23 21:30:06)
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 02:39:10PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > Quoting Michael Niedermayer (2024-08-20 22:57:37)
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 01:26:53PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > > ---
> > > >  libavutil/opt.h | 78 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/libavutil/opt.h b/libavutil/opt.h
> > > > index 07e27a9208..23bc495158 100644
> > > > --- a/libavutil/opt.h
> > > > +++ b/libavutil/opt.h
> > > > @@ -240,26 +240,98 @@
> > > >   * before the file is actually opened.
> > > >   */
> > > >  
> > > > +/**
> > > > + * An option type determines:
> > > > + * - for native access, the underlying C type of the field that an AVOption
> > > > + *   refers to;
> > > > + * - for foreign access, the semantics of accessing the option through this API,
> > > > + *   e.g. which av_opt_get_*() and av_opt_set_*() functions can be called, or
> > > > + *   what format will av_opt_get()/av_opt_set() expect/produce.
> > > 
> > > "foreign access" ? is this a standard/ common term ?
> > > if not, maybe somone has a more descriptive more common term/idea
> > 
> > The term is defined higher up in the file, cf. fc706276c05
> 
> if it sounds fine to you, then no objection.
> I wonder if direct vs access through accessor functions are clearer
> terms though

That's not what the difference is.

-- 
Anton Khirnov