[vlc-devel] commit: Added vlc_get_libvlc_object to libvlccore (Basos G )

[basos g]

2008/12/16 Pierre d'Herbemont <pdherbemont at gmail.com>:
>
>
> On 16 déc. 08, at 09:26, "basos g" <noxelia at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2008/12/15 git version control <git at videolan.org>:
>>> vlc | branch: master | Basos G <noxelia at gmail.com> | Fri Dec 12
>>> 17:12:17 2008 +0200| [21f561ba4af65b0a34ccbc98ed13317c96a96934] |
>>> committer: Rémi Denis-Courmont
>>>
>>> Added vlc_get_libvlc_object to libvlccore
>>>
>>> It is intented to expose the libvlc_int_t (the main vlc object)
>>> to enable extented vlc hacking.. E.g. when you need to make something
>>> with configuration or modules that it is not provided by the PUBLIC
>>> API,
>>> you expose the libvlc_int_t as an vlc_object_t and act upon it with
>>> the internal (libvlccore) API...
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rémi Denis-Courmont <rdenis at simphalempin.com>
>>>
>>> Put back to libvlc rather than libvlccore (a stupid idea of mine).
>>>
>>
>>
>> I think your idea was ok :
>> the user of this function wants libvlc_int_t to act upon it with
>> libvlccore API. In addition the release of this function is done by
>> vlc_object_release (libvlccore).
>> For these reasons i think it is  more consistent to be exported from
>> libvlccore. In my branch i'm already using it within a project in
>> linux and windows.
>
> But then you need to link libvlccore with libvlc. That's not wanted...
>

I cannot see this as libvlc_get_vlc_instance or
vlc_get_internal_object calls functions of libvlccore ONLY. The only
linkage that this function imposes to libvlc is the struct
libvlc_int_t. But that is surpassed by declaring struct libvlc_int_t ;
inside vlc_main.h and that's all. A dirty function acting on the
second stage API should be exported by this.

PS: Or at least if you insist on exporting it from libvlc we should
include the libvlc_release_vlc_instance for clearance.
>>
>> Of course the user of this API should have all the includes (not just
>> the SDK exported ones under include/vlc). But this makes sense cause
>> you want libvlccore functions to act upon the object anyway.
>> _______________________________________________
>> vlc-devel mailing list
>> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options:
>> http://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/vlc-devel
> _______________________________________________
> vlc-devel mailing list
> To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options:
> http://mailman.videolan.org/listinfo/vlc-devel
>