Re: vtables

Artem Baguinski wrote:
> i forgot to mention about these vtables:
> 
> 1. different subsystems have different structures with small number of
>    methods to implement [e.g. decoder_vtable_t contains only decoder
>    spesific calls, encoder_vtable_t - only encoder specific,
>    input_vtable_t - only input specific etc.] 
> 
>    this makes implementation easier and the module code cleaner.

IMO we don't need different structures (see my previous email). If a 
filter wants to support all features (a decoder, coder, renderer) why not ?

It only needs to fill the structure it knows about.

BTW, instead of a pull mode for this structure/vtable 
(get_your_vtable()), it's easier if that's a push method 
(this_is_my_vtable()). This way the supported features of a filter can 
be hardcoded. And only the "receiver" of this vtable needs to read what 
it needs. Which it will have to do in both cases, anyway.