Hello, On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:30:06PM +0100, Michael Niedermayer wrote: > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 01:56:00PM +0100, Reimar Doeffinger wrote: > > > also i would pass the palette like a normal video frame into the decoder > > > instead of using AVCodecContext > > > > Sure, that would be preferable, but how to tell the decoder this is a > > palette? Adding a flag parameter to the decode function? That would make > > for quite a huge patch a (and a lot of work to make it)... > > Advantage: that way could also be used for some other kinds of "extradata". > > my hope would be that the decoder could figure out that a packet contains a > palette witout any additional info Thus probably duplicating complexity from the demuxer in this case. And I don't have any idea how this should be possible e.g. in the case of raw video e.g. in AVI. If course, that has only one palette that could be passed via extradata, but that does not seems like a clean solution to me. Another solution would be to do something currently reserved like passing a NULL pointer as "int *data_size" parameter. Hackish with the beautiful side effect of crashing most decoders on palette packets. Would be also possible to somehow mark the palette specially in the demuxer, but that kind of stuff IMO does not belong into the demuxer any more than palette conversion. Greetings, Reimar Doeffinger
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4