[gst-devel] 0.8 in 2.6 ?

Andy Wingo wingo at pobox.com
Mon Oct 20 05:41:06 CEST 2003

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Ronald Bultje wrote:

> On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 17:17, Andy Wingo wrote:
> > Um, I look in gst-guile's gstreamer-support.h and I see functions like:
> > 
> > GList*          gst_element_class_get_pad_templates (GstElementClass *klass);
> Well, you'll end up with having macros and functions for each of these,
> while they all do the same thing. Consider GST_STATE (element) vs.
> gst_element_get_state (element) and so on.

What dust-corners of the API exist that language bindings could shine a
light on?

Macros vs. functions is one such corner, I think. Macros are faster for
C programming, which is important. However, functions are easier to
wrap. I was just saying, if you are concerned with increasing
wrappability (I just made a new word), these should prolly be added.

Thoughts? Esp. from Dave (Lehn) and Murray. I can always keep these
functions in gst-guile, but if they are also wrapped manually in your
languages it might make sense to make functions for the core.



More information about the gstreamer-devel mailing list