[gst-devel] plugin breakage

[Andy Wingo]

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Benjamin Otte wrote:

> On Sat, 8 Nov 2003, Andy Wingo wrote:
> 
> > So I'm not sure which one is better: the extra syntactic hassle of
> > making base_init functions or the hassle of going through the list and
> > individually reffing pad templates. When you have properties you
> > have to have a class_init, but there's not a real need for base_init, it
> > seems to me. As long as you can share pad templates just by reffing,
> > anyway.
> >
> It certainly is a possibility to make every class_init function ref the
> padtemplates itself. But that doesn't buy you anything but trouble I
> think. (You still work on the same GList elements for example)
> Especially when you consider the fact that GStreamer wants to support
> unloading of modules some time in the future.

1) An element class tends to know which elements it is inheriting from,
and thus, what exactly it is overriding. After all, loop and chain
functions are specific to one class, not inherited.

2) For module unloading, the GstElementClass base finalizer should be
the one to clean up fields stored on the GstElementClass part of the
class.

Look, I don't have a strong feeling about this ;) I just wanted to say
that TMTOWTDI.

Regards,

wingo.