[vorbis-dev] new DLL additions in core libs

[Segher Boessenkool]

Kenneth Arnold wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 01:14:00PM -0700, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> > Not much, really, IMHO.
> 
> Perhaps I overestimated; I haven't been nearly as deep into the code
> as you probably have, but I did note a few of these functions and
> suspected that there were others.

There is some stuff shared right now; but I argue that less _should_
be shared.

> > This kind of coding makes for code that's hard to read, and error-prone.
> > Funny that you mention _vds_shared_init() in this context.
> 
> *gasp* Segher insulting Monty's code? Well it is kinda hard to read,
> and people have been reporting crashes in that very function, so...

I'm not insulting anyone, I'm just saying that I don't like certain
pieces of code.

> > I'm not a win32 expert.  But even on un*x, separating the library
> > into a libvorbisdec and a libvorbisenc seems to make more sense than
> > our current situation.
> >
> > I'm not saying that we should restructure because win32 seems to have
> > some stupid limitations; I'm saying that we might as well try to do
> > The Right Thing(tm).
> 
> Thinking about it again it seems indeed much more logical; an encoder
> typically won't need the decoder parts, and a decoder / player /
> (hardware DSP player) won't need the encoding parts. If it's as little
> of a waste of code as you make it out to be, so what?

I think we have encode+decode in one right now, because that was easier
during initial development.

> 
> Speaking of which, what's the current status on Vorbis hardware
> players?

They are not for sale, as far as I know.

Segher

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-dev-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.