[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] avfilter: add ocr filter

[Anshul]

On September 18, 2015 9:12:46 PM IST, wm4 <nfxjfg at googlemail.com> wrote:
>On 18.09.2015 17:19, Nicolas George wrote:
>> wm4:
>>> Nice snarky, content-free remark. But you know that just because a
>hack got
>>> "blessed" because it has "verified users", this is not a reason to
>implement
>>> things in the right way, so that they are also maintainable and
>orthogonal.
>>
>> Do you intend to propose a patch that implements things "the right
>way",
>> "orthogonal", in less than, let's say, two years? If not, do not
>criticize
>> people who propose something that works.
>
>I have no interest in ffmpeg.c, so of course I won't. But I had a
>pretty 
>simple way to implement it in mpv without having to go through 
>ridiculous things like a libavfilter movie source filter. It was 
>probably 10 lines in total.
>
>>> (Or what do you tell to a user who wants to add hardsubbing captions
>to his
>>> existing transcode commandline? Have fun.)
>>
>> Maybe I tell them to wait until the genius wm4 has condescended to
>implement
>> it.
>>
>> My patches, either for sub2video or for subcc in movie, are indeed
>ugly
>> hacks, I never denied it. But they work, right now, and they are of
>service
>> to users. Furthermore, they are isolated features, without tendrils
>all over
>> the place, without causing unrelated problems and ready to be removed
>when a
>> proper implementation is committed.
>>
>> By disparaging them, you are insulting both me and every user who
>uses the
>> features. There are very few people whose contributions are so
>invaluable
>> that the community has to bear with their rudeness.
>
>Honestly, I find most of your passively aggressive replies at least 
>annoying and often enough definitely sound like they're intended to 
>insult. You just did it again - read your mail. Maybe you could turn it
>
>down a little?
>
>And just for the protocol, yes, I called it a terrible hack, but you 
>agree that it's an "ugly hack", so I'm not sure what I did wrong here.
>
>By implementing something as a hack, you put the burden on future 
>generations of developers who somehow have to clean it up (instead of 
>only having to implement it the right way), and of course without 
>causing any "regressions". (Which means pretty please duplicate all the
>
>fucked corner-casey up stuff that happened to work because of a
>specific 
>implementation etc.)
>
>You know, I don't do this to argue with you to death or because I enjoy
>
>fighting (surprisingly I don't) - I just want sane technical solutions,
>
>because just committing mistakes causes a magnitude of more work at a 
>later point. Either because somehow has to clean it up, or because
>it'll 
>be so hard to fix bugs/add features.
>
>Anyway, the bottom line is, no you can't output a subtitle stream, if 
>you want to, add subtitles to lavfi.
>
>_______________________________________________

Hey guys,

Dont want to add salt in this fight,
But on end note can anyone define what is "hack" ?

Because I get this answer to most of my approch.

Mine Analysed defination of hack in this community is that when other developers dont understand the code or when it is out of  the general aproch, developers here call it hack. I might be wrong with my notion but I am asking to confirm.

this question was also creeping in my brain because  none of Google defination match here:
Hack:
verb

    cut with rough or heavy blows.
    gain unauthorized access to data in a system or computer.
    cough persistently.
    manage; cope.

noun

    a rough cut, blow, or stroke.
    an act of computer hacking.


Note: I dont want to hijack original thread,  so please explain with refrence to this thread that which way of implentation wont be consider hack, which ways for ocr would be consider hack.

I am not speaking to make fun or insult, but it was far easy to implement ocr of dvbsub to get srt from dvbdub in ccextractor  then here in FFmpeg because of unclear definition of hack. So I beg to make it clear today.

I really dont want answers in gurbish, like:
 1) hack is that it would make difficult to developer or maintainer( until how do you scale difficult and easy, as per human brain is concerned difficult is what we dont understand which is non comparative ) 


The worst answer of hack is that: this is not the way I do in ffmpeg,
Since that is the reason you could not do it and new approch is needed.

Thanks
Anshul 

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.