[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