[FFmpeg-devel] [RFC] *put_bits_* functions renamings

[Stefano Sabatini]

On date Tuesday 2009-04-14 13:25:29 +0200, Michael Niedermayer encoded:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 11:33:39AM +0200, Diego Biurrun wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:56:20PM -0300, Ramiro Polla wrote:
> > > 2009/4/12 M?ns Rullg?rd <mans at mansr.com>:
> > > > Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> > > >> On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 12:52:35AM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > >>> On date Friday 2009-04-10 18:53:22 +0100, M?ns Rullg?rd encoded:
> > > >>> > Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:
> > > >>> > > On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 05:22:23PM +0200, Stefano Sabatini wrote:
> > > >>> > >> the new name is consistent with the name for which a function should
> > > >>> > >> be prefixed (rather than suffixed) by a prefix telling the namespace
> > > >>> > >> to which it applyies, it is also consistent with all the other
> > > >>> > >> put_bits_* functions and more grep-friendly.
> > > >>> > >
> > > >>> > > iam rather used to flush_put_bits() so iam mildly against the rename
> > > >>> > > that is unless several other devels want the rename
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > All the other functions are put_bits_*, and we have get_bits_*. ?I'm
> > > >>> > in favour of renaming it to keep things consistent.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Actually this is my complete evil plan for the *put_bits* functions:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> init_put_bits ? ? ? ? ? ?-> ?put_bits_init
> > > >>> put_bits_count ? ? ? ? ? -> ?put_bits_count
> > > >>> flush_put_bits ? ? ? ? ? -> ?put_bits_flush
> > > >>> align_put_bits ? ? ? ? ? -> ?put_bits_align
> > > >>> ff_put_string ? ? ? ? ? ?-> ?put_bits_string (put_bits_put_string?)
> > > >>> ff_copy_bits ? ? ? ? ? ? -> ?put_bits_copy
> > > >>> put_bits ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? -> ?put_bits
> > > >>> pbBufPtr ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? -> ?put_bits_get_buf_ptr (put_bits_buf_ptr?)
> > > >>> skip_put_bits ? ? ? ? ? ?-> ?put_bits_skip
> > > >>> skip_put_bytes ? ? ? ? ? -> ?put_bits_skip_bytes
> > > >>> set_put_bits_buffer_size -> ?put_bits_set_buffer_size
> > > >>> put_sbits ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?-> ?put_bits_signed? (I still have to read the function...)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So the idea basically is to prefix all the functions with "put_bits",
> > > >>> and try to follow consistent naming rules, with eventual variations
> > > >>> with respect to the above table to accomodate devels
> > > >>> preferences/suggestions.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Also I don't think it would make sense to rename just few functions,
> > > >>> since the idea was to provide a consistent functions set.
> > > >>
> > > >> i prefer to keep the functions named as they are.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to see those names made more consistent. ?With the
> > > > current names it's hard to find something if you don't know the exact
> > > > name.
> > > 
> > > FWIW I'm also in favour of making the names more consistent.
> > 
> > I tend to agree, consistent naming should pay off in the long run.
> 
> The names are largely consistent, what has been suggested above is
> to change XYZ to ZYX naming
> making things consistent within the current system is something i have
> no problem with, what is suggested above is something i do have a
> problem with, people are used to the naming writing all names backward
> just makes no sense

The idea was to provide a common prefix, having that means to easily
detects that a function belongs to a given set of functions, and looks
like a rule followed by most of the modules in FFmpeg:

avcodec_
avformat_
avdevice_
avfilter_
av_lfg_
avpicture_
av_base64_
av_hwaccel_
av_parser_
av_tree_
ff_timefilter_
...

> also
> stefano removes the _NEEDED_ ff prefixes (yeah its consistent just
>    wrong)

If it is needed then I suggest to prefix that to *all* the functions
(ff_ in ff_put_string was originally put to prevent a namespace
collision).

> the names become longer and they are names of commonly used functions

If you look at the above table most names length is kept the same.

> stefano makes them inconsistant with the rest of ffmpeg, s is commonly
>    used as abbreviation for signed ...
>
> and fixing above the only thing left is the reversing of words

As already mentioned, we have two rules in conflict, one is the
namespace prefixing rule and the other is to try to resemble the
English language. What's the better?

I believe namespace_ prefixing has more technical advantages, but then
I'm not the maintainer and both of us have better ways to waste their
time.

Regards.
-- 
FFmpeg = Faithful and Frenzy MultiPurpose Eretic Gadget