[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH 09/12] asf: rename GUIDs to correspond to the specs

Ronald S. Bultje rsbultje
Sat Feb 12 22:57:58 CET 2011


Hi,

On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Anton Khirnov <anton at khirnov.net> wrote:
> ---
> ?libavformat/asf.c ? ? ? ?| ? 64 +++++++++++++++---------------
> ?libavformat/asf.h ? ? ? ?| ? 67 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
> ?libavformat/asfdec.c ? ? | ? 98 +++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> ?libavformat/asfenc.c ? ? | ? 36 ++++++++--------
> ?libavformat/mms.c ? ? ? ?| ? 10 ++--
> ?libavformat/rtpdec_asf.c | ? ?4 +-
> ?6 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 138 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/libavformat/asf.c b/libavformat/asf.c
> index 1f6af18..dcffd71 100644
> --- a/libavformat/asf.c
> +++ b/libavformat/asf.c
> @@ -20,122 +20,122 @@
>
> ?#include "asf.h"
>
> -
> -const ff_asf_guid ff_asf_header = {
> +const ff_asf_guid ff_asf_guid_header = {

So just to recap my IRC thing here: why the long ff_asf_guid_...
prefix? Isn't it quite obvious that it's a guid? I mean, after all it
_is_ a guid, it's like int ff_asf_int_i; ff_asf_ is acceptable because
they're non-static, but the int part is a little much. Same here, I'd
prefer to dropt he guid_ part in the renames. The rest is fine if it
matches the spec, I believe you're also removing a couple of unused
ones, so the log msg should be updated. ;-).

Ronald



More information about the ffmpeg-devel mailing list