[Matroska-devel] Re: [Ffmpeg-devel] Adding matroska support to FFMPEG via libmatroska/libebml, in C++ ?

Roman Shaposhnick rvs at sun.com
Mon Oct 13 23:02:48 CEST 2003

It may sound funny, but that's how I judge an A/V format I know
nothing of: if it can be written in good understandable C and
the implementation is short enough to be grasped by just looking
at C source -- than it's a good one.

Just my 2c.


P.S. Granted, I suppose, there are a lot of examples when a 
potentially good format could be completely screwed by the 
implementation (take libpng for example) but still...

On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 09:38:47PM +0200, Christian HJ Wiesner wrote:
> Hi Roman,
> Roman Shaposhnick wrote:
> >Personally, I'd be against adding C++ parts to ffmpeg.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Roman.
> >
> >P.S. Why did you pick C++ to develop a potentially cross-platform library
> >in the first place: it's so much harder to get a buy-in for a C++ code.... 
> >No offense, just curious ....
> > 
> >
> To be honest, i guess we never expected that matroska would become such 
> a great success in the first place, so the acceptance of the main 
> library for integration into well introduced and widespread libs like 
> FFMPEG was not at all in the focus when our devs, mainly Steve 'robux4' 
> Lhomme, started working on the lib. They simply chose a language they 
> thought would allow them the best results in the shortest possible time, 
> and for sure one major reason here was that all of them were fitter in 
> coding in C++ than in C.
> Strange enough, there are 3 different implementations now ( 
> libmatroska/libebml, Gabest' Guliverkli matroska DShow filters and 
> alexnoe's AVImux-GUI ), and all of them are C++ :O ! To make sure there 
> is no misunderstanding, both Gabest and alexnoe were NOT using 
> libmatroska for their tools, but coded their own implementation based on 
> the specs, and each of them decided to go for C++ for that.
> Of course, we know very well that matroska's success is based on the 
> existing apps for making matroska files, namely Mosu's MKVtoolnix on 
> Linux ( and now also Win32 ) and Cyrius' VirtualdubMod, and again both 
> preferred using the C++ lib instead of rewriting it in C ..... anyhow, 
> thanks for the update, i hope some day somebody will make a 4th 
> implementation in plain C, and you guys help to include it into FFMPEG 
> :) .....
> Christian
> matroska project admin
> http://www.matroska.org
> >On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 03:24:15AM +0200, Christian HJ Wiesner wrote:
> > 
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>given we would change our license to L-GPL, whats the current opinion of 
> >>the dev team on including C++ code into FFMPEG ? Has it changed since 
> >>then, with GCC support for C++ being improved lately, or you still 
> >>insist on plain C ? No offense, just curious ....
> >>
> >>Christian
> >>matroska project admin
> >>http://www.matroska.org
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program.
> SourceForge.net hosts over 70,000 Open Source Projects.
> See the people who have HELPED US provide better services:
> Click here: http://sourceforge.net/supporters.php
> _______________________________________________
> Ffmpeg-devel mailing list
> Ffmpeg-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

More information about the Matroska-devel mailing list