2011/8/26 Arun Raghavan <arun.raghavan at collabora.co.uk>: > And as you might have guessed by now, the problem is that the WebRTC > code is all C++. It's not very C++-y really (it's even built with > -fno-rtti), and fairly straight-forward to use. > > I was originally thinking of pulling this code into our tree, but > there's quite a bit of it, and Colin and I both think it makes sense to > package the WebRTC audio processing bits separately. That said, I'd > still prefer to just use the code as-is instead of maintaining a C > wrapper library around it. The best option IMHO would be to maintain the C wrapper upstream, bit I'm not sure whether the WebRTC project agrees. > This means a conditional build-time dependency on the C++ compiler and > libstdc++ for module-echo-cancel (conditional depending on whether you > want the WebRTC bits or not). The impact on other code is mainly the > addition of PA_C_DECL_BEGIN/END in various headers that didn't > previously care about being included in C++ code. But this is no big issue either. I expect that you make the build script smart enough not to use any C++ stuff when only speex is used. Maarten > IMO this shouldn't affect people who really care about not having C++ as > a dep, and gives us the potential to use some nifty features in the > WebRTC code. Given this, does anyone have any objections? > > Cheers, > Arun > > _______________________________________________ > pulseaudio-discuss mailing list > pulseaudio-discuss at lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pulseaudio-discuss >
