On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 11:10:43AM +0100, Andrew Sayers wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 12:04:34PM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > Quoting Andrew Sayers (2024-04-23 11:51:00)
> > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 11:21:27AM +0200, Anton Khirnov wrote:
> > > > > lavu/opt: Clarify that AVOptions is not indended for general use
> > > > 
> > > > They _are_ intended for general use though.
> > > 
> > > In that case I'm confused...
> > > 
> > > Let's say I make a desktop app to transcode videos.  Obviously I would use
> > > AVOptions to display configuration options for different encoders.  And it's
> > > possible to create AVOptions objects for my UI.  But how strongly is that use
> > > case recommended?
> > > 
> > > To provide a particularly difficult example - let's say I want to let the user
> > > choose between interface themes, and I want to show both some text and a
> > > picture of the theme.  AVOption doesn't include a "text + picture" option,
> > > so how would I extend it to meet my needs?
> > 
> > If they fit your use case, then use them, otherwise don't - that's true
> > for pretty much all APIs we provide.
> 
> Ah ok, so how about if I changed "intended" to "optimized" in the subject?

If FFmpeg which is a multimedia tool in no place needs or wants to store
pictures through its option API in a way not curently supported.
I would say thats not going to qualify as "general use" outside specialized
software thats already dealing with a lot of pictures

still you certainly can handle binary data (like a bitmap picture) through
AVOption

thx

[...]
-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being
governed by those who are dumber. -- Plato