[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 2/5] avutil/channel_layout: add AV_CHANNEL_ORDER_NB

Marton Balint cus at passwd.hu
Sat Feb 17 00:42:36 EET 2024



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 <cus at passwd.hu>
>>>>  ---
>>>>    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


More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list