[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH]Add Dirac support to ffmpeg via libdirac_* and Schroedinger libraries]

[Anuradha Suraparaju]

On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 23:53 +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 08:37:04PM +1000, Anuradha Suraparaju wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 10:22 +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 02:05:16PM +1000, Anuradha Suraparaju wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 19:13 +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 01:07:10AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 09:15:51PM +1000, Anuradha Suraparaju wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- ffmpegsvn_trunk/libavcodec/Makefile	2008-04-17 11:14:38.000000000 +1000
> > > > > > > +++ ffmpegsvn_trunk_dirac/libavcodec/Makefile	2008-04-17 20:43:41.000000000 +1000
> > > > > > > @@ -317,6 +319,8 @@
> > > > > > >  OBJS-$(CONFIG_LIBAMR_WB)               += libamr.o
> > > > > > > +OBJS-$(CONFIG_LIBDIRAC_DECODER)        += libdiracdec.o
> > > > > > > +OBJS-$(CONFIG_LIBDIRAC_ENCODER)        += libdiracenc.o libdirac.o diracschro_common.o 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Either libdirac.o is common to both the decoder and encoder or there is
> > > > > > no need to add libdirac.o and diracschro_common.o...
> > > > > 
> > > > > To be a bit more precise: If libdiracdec.o does not depend on
> > > > > libdirac.o, then you can just merge libdiracenc.c and libdirac.c.
> > > > 
> > > > OK. Should I send a modified patch incorporating this change?
> > > 
> > > Since I already have my local tree modified, an incremental patch would
> > > be more convenient.  Or just answer the question here.  What does
> > > libdiracdec.o really depend on?
> > 
> > libdiracdec.o depends on the libdirac.h file in the patch.
> 
> I know that.  I'll try to phrase my question more clearly:
> 
> Your patch contains the following two lines:
> 
> +OBJS-$(CONFIG_LIBDIRAC_DECODER)        += libdiracdec.o
> +OBJS-$(CONFIG_LIBDIRAC_ENCODER)        += libdiracenc.o libdirac.o diracschro_common.o 
> 
> This is either plain wrong because it should really be
> 
> +OBJS-$(CONFIG_LIBDIRAC_DECODER)        += libdiracdec.o libdirac.o diracschro_common.o 
> +OBJS-$(CONFIG_LIBDIRAC_ENCODER)        += libdiracenc.o libdirac.o diracschro_common.o 
> 
> or it is badly architected because libdiracenc.c and libdirac.c can and
> should be merged because libdiracdec.o does not depend on any functions
> contained in libdirac.o and diracschro_common.o.
> 
> Which of the two is the case?

I agree that libdirac.c should be mergedinto libdiracenc.c. But
diracschro_common.c (now renamed to libdirac_libschro.c in the svn
trunk) has routines that are common to libdiracenc.c,
libschroedingerenc.c and libcschroedingerdec.c.

> 
> Diego

Regards,
Anuradha