Marcus Overhagen <marcusoverhagen@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > We planed to allow the user to configure which codec is chosen > > > for > > > a particular format (from a list of codecs that support the > > > format), > > > but nobody implemented it. > > I remember that much, yes, but I don't remember how the initial > > (unconfigured) list is built - first in first rules? > I don't know. Didn't you write that code? Hehe :) > However, I'm pretty sure that the configuration file is not used at > all. > Only the data published by the codecs does matter right now. Exactly, I meant to ask how it was supposed to be, not how it actually is at the moment :) > > > > But some sort of priority expressed by the codec would be great > > > > anyway. > > > I don't think this is a good idea. > > As an initial hint, why not? As a codec writer, I should have a > > good > > idea about how good my codec is at parsing a certain stream?! > It adds complexity. Each codec would have to publish for each format > a confidence or priority level. I don't think that adding all this > does bode > well. It doesn't add that much complexity, but I don't think we should do it for R1 if that would require any public API changes. Bye, Axel.