Re: Full review of the help message
Michael Militzer <[email protected]> Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:03:28 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.video.xvid.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Elio, thanks, it's a nice patch. Reviewed and applied. I think the reason why there's no help text for the -zones option is simply that it's a complex option, hard to use and not easy to find a good help text for. The documented way of creating zones is using the -z[qw] option. Best regards, Michael Quoting Elio Blanca <[email protected]>: > > This patch includes a full review of the usage text, which now prints > the actual value for any option, with some trick. > For example, you say you want to compress your videos using always a > max keyframe interval of 150 instead of 300. Well, you can change the > default value, type `make' and xvid_encraw will always use 150 as max > keyframe interval from now on (you don't need to type it every time), > and it DOES print this value in the help message! So you know which > value you are using, even if you don't ever type it on the command line. > The further trick is tied to on/off options. > You say you always want to use the `packed bitstream' option but typing > the option is boring. So, again, you can change the default value (set > it to 1) and run `make' and the shiny new xvid_encraw will always > enable the packed_bitstream feature by default. At that point, the help > message won't ever print the option needed for ACTIVATING that feature, > because it is always enabled; instead, it will say you how to DISABLE > it. Try disabling the same feature (set the value to 0), run make, and > then the help message will say you how to ENABLE it. > I think this may help keeping the usage message short yet useful. > > There's a new issue I will investigate next time. > I see the code is able to parse a `-zones' option structured as > framenumber,type,weight,options/framenumber,type,weight,options/... > but - well - I didn't see the whole stuff deep enough. > The actual help message doesn't tell anything about this, why? > Is this feature about to be removed? > Isn't it fully tested?