gbazin at netcourrier.com
Mon Apr 29 20:34:26 CEST 2002
On Monday 29 April 2002 20:03, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2002, Gildas Bazin wrote:
> > Dunno... I kind of like having the crusty OS specific details in a
> > structure. That way, I don't polute too much the p_main structure with
> > Win32 specific details. Also if in the future we want to allow for some
> > kind of plugins binary comaptibility between minor releases, it might
> > things easier to have this p_main->p_sys structure.
> Well if a change to p_main breaks compatibility I fail to see how the
> same change to p_main->p_sys could help in any way...
Becareful, I didn't say it was necessary, I just said it might help.
The reasoning behind this is that to maintain binary compatibility you can
only append new elements to the existing structure. So if you don't use the
p_sys structure, you can end-up with a mess like this one:
which I don't really like.
Maybe this p_sys structure won't be used much anyway, so it may not really
matter in the end, but my preference would be to keep it anyway.
This is the vlc-devel mailing-list, see http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
To unsubscribe, please read http://www.videolan.org/lists.html
If you are in trouble, please contact <postmaster at videolan.org>
More information about the vlc-devel