[QUESTION] Clarify VCL HRD parameters TODO in avc_functions.c:907 #859

New Issue

claunia · 2026-01-29T16:55:34Z

claunia commented

2026-01-29 16:55:34 +00:00

Originally created by @Harshdhall01 on GitHub (Dec 25, 2025).

Description:

While exploring the codebase for GSoC 2026 preparation, I found a TODO comment that needs clarification:

Location: src/lib_ccx/avc_functions.c:907

Current code:

if (tmp)
{
    // TODO.
    mprint("vcl_hrd. Not implemented for now. Hopefully not needed. Skipping rest of NAL\n");
    ctx->num_vcl_hrd++;
    // exit(1);
}

Context:
This code handles VCL (Video Coding Layer) HRD parameters in H.264/AVC video processing. Currently:

The functionality is deliberately skipped with a warning message
A counter (ctx->num_vcl_hrd++) tracks occurrences
The exit(1) was commented out, suggesting the skip is acceptable

Questions:

Is VCL HRD parameter support still needed, or has this proven unnecessary in practice?
Should the TODO be:
- Removed if VCL HRD support isn't needed?
- Expanded with details if implementation is still desired?
- Converted to an issue if it's a substantial feature?
Does the num_vcl_hrd counter show this case occurs frequently in real-world files?

Proposed action:
Based on guidance:

If not needed: Remove TODO, improve the warning message
If needed: Create detailed specification of what needs implementation
If rare: Document that it's an edge case being tracked

Background:
Working toward GSoC 2026 with CCExtractor. First PR (#1889) merged. Focusing on video codec processing and decoder improvements for the CCExtractor 1.00 project.

Happy to submit a PR once I understand the preferred approach!

Originally created by @Harshdhall01 on GitHub (Dec 25, 2025). Description: While exploring the codebase for GSoC 2026 preparation, I found a TODO comment that needs clarification: Location: `src/lib_ccx/avc_functions.c:907` Current code: ```c if (tmp) { // TODO. mprint("vcl_hrd. Not implemented for now. Hopefully not needed. Skipping rest of NAL\n"); ctx->num_vcl_hrd++; // exit(1); } ``` Context: This code handles VCL (Video Coding Layer) HRD parameters in H.264/AVC video processing. Currently: - The functionality is deliberately skipped with a warning message - A counter (`ctx->num_vcl_hrd++`) tracks occurrences - The `exit(1)` was commented out, suggesting the skip is acceptable Questions: 1. Is VCL HRD parameter support still needed, or has this proven unnecessary in practice? 2. Should the TODO be: - **Removed** if VCL HRD support isn't needed? - **Expanded** with details if implementation is still desired? - **Converted to an issue** if it's a substantial feature? 3. Does the `num_vcl_hrd` counter show this case occurs frequently in real-world files? **Proposed action:** Based on guidance: - If not needed: Remove TODO, improve the warning message - If needed: Create detailed specification of what needs implementation - If rare: Document that it's an edge case being tracked Background: Working toward GSoC 2026 with CCExtractor. First PR (#1889) merged. Focusing on video codec processing and decoder improvements for the CCExtractor 1.00 project. Happy to submit a PR once I understand the preferred approach!

claunia referenced this issue

2026-01-29 17:17:59 +00:00

[PR #859] [CLOSED] 3 tv shows #1691

Sign in to join this conversation.

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/ccextractor#859