[MPlayer-dev-eng] [PATCH] vd_null to output black frames

Reimar Döffinger Reimar.Doeffinger at gmx.de
Thu Nov 1 21:56:53 CET 2012


On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 09:51:09PM +0100, Alexander Strasser wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:41:53PM +0800, Xidorn Quan wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> > > > On 15 Oct 2012, at 21:48, Alexander Strasser <eclipse7 at gmx.net> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >  Done and committed.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for taking care of it.
> > > > Btw. it might make sense to point to the special-case null and black
> > > > strcmp code from the codecs.conf entries, since it is related to why a
> > > > codec entry without any fourccs even makes sense.
> > > > Alternatively, having a flag in the codec structure to indicate such
> > > > "dummy" codecs might make it more obvious, too.
> > > >
> > > 
> > > The patch attached adds a flag for dummy codecs. Is it ok?
> > 
> > I had actually thought making it a flag in the codec struct in the vd_*.c file,
> > but I think I actually like your idea better :-)
> > So, looks fine to me.
> 
>   I was thinking if "dummy" is expressive enough as a name for a configuration
> flag. Would "ignore_fourcc" be easier to understand for someone reading codecs.conf?
> 
>   I do not particularly care about the naming but I do like the patch. So please
> do not understand this as a blocking issue. Just wanted to find out what other
> developers think.

It's more that I thought we might want to use it for other stuff, for
example not bothering with copying around the actual data of the
packets, or running a parser in certain cases or such.
Which is why I'd currently be more in favour of "dummy" than something
specific.
But I don't dare to try to predict if that will really make sense in the
long run.


More information about the MPlayer-dev-eng mailing list