On 07/08/2023 19:55, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 7.08.2023 20:49, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
On 07/08/2023 19:45, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
That can be taken care of with match data.
Konrad
Well perhaps.
I'm just sticking my oar in, to elucidate.
The compat sub-nodes aren't just a random choice with no logic. They exist to select between what you assign the blocks to be, encoder, decoder or any admixture thereof.
A functionality we want to maintain.
Surely something like a modparam would be more suitable here?
Konrad
Hmm.
Well from earlier in the thread the question "why do we have these
compat strings" is because we can have any combination of
encoder/decoder assigned.
If there's a cogent argument _still_ to be made to transition to some
new way of assignment then fine so long as we don't break that basic
flexibility.
Though my own €0.02 is that a module parameter is more of a PITA than a
compat string.
OTOH I could make the argument, that the high probability is most people
- probably all, just instantiate a single encoder and decoder and aren't
aware of or using the inbuilt flexibility.
@stan probably has the right idea what to do.
---
bod
