Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:116591 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 45988 invoked from network); 8 Dec 2021 17:22:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO php-smtp4.php.net) (45.112.84.5) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 8 Dec 2021 17:22:24 -0000 Received: from php-smtp4.php.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42C2C18037F for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 10:22:54 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on php-smtp4.php.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Virus: No X-Envelope-From: Received: from mail-yb1-f181.google.com (mail-yb1-f181.google.com [209.85.219.181]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by php-smtp4.php.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 10:22:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yb1-f181.google.com with SMTP id j2so7934093ybg.9 for ; Wed, 08 Dec 2021 10:22:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=CBPtHEttUPS6gL/qr98d+jnjVp84eJj0jX8Mfk5xYCU=; b=pJUOyZ0hsmRMN+vk6EQxQguXIK8VWVfRJgLIQyq6bmSBtfB7/gbSroMS7afSFLSBAC pDayX26PPXLFhQIF1nsO+0VtKcK9Ja/D2KlWZhZIqZA3+E+AKZMgEGpmjtfXy79b2zjz DCrGqRGUk+19zW8z/D+L/U7fBPJuDbWGMUnynyqpY/q/W4S+zbHoLc+UNX0uVEtI87O4 b4+hONIPsC51g00jy46pu6FevGnmaQSffgT7whXZOs+QXxR+wz3jn2DmPkNvslqyKi4S MOZCESB69gUymoIB/BywfEOL626k3yOhOIEVA0cCibjTLj0xpWqfUKlAreO2DrzHvlXF dy+Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=CBPtHEttUPS6gL/qr98d+jnjVp84eJj0jX8Mfk5xYCU=; b=1VGiJw1cWvzpKEUU6TII5RWUzNTyNR6b/C7cOCJcOJTEdHSkjLmqQbjPjPGxhZ9vhd ioX1wMNUwTbwjKuwvZ0VcYNQOTpbnGxhFoCHSn956KfnQ3z3t19/m0Vwtfsmg9zOZh8p pTwsJFtBu3o/dB4a52eHTpl8zJXO5wpvQagt1lqyTpuNOxA6VQjpwzWUFyx0qR49YCvk MrRyhnqaWo+5kGTCeqxalZFX07+AabrVBfKlrPnO0dpNx9PHWOLWXhfASgcASFV+Z7G0 48d687o02OnD8dUPSJ5BqYiOFcsvdgFxCRKaEOLql0p+fraERmDmrPC9TxKMxmGK6fR9 lM0w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532H8WcSJ+0NEPXO0xd35S6/orHg6QCPJZ0X9xrcEQpLT+LSGENO UW5xXzosgEUBk1MNwx02TArNYQYxGBs0kGtRQyELZA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxZJaJLh4TejdBHAGU1RaLrGA/LlRkAXazGqHAmqam6bAYSIRWlDj8yq0s0Nl0OrKelD4jFhQG/KIsQUqGSq50= X-Received: by 2002:a25:6b46:: with SMTP id o6mr385548ybm.19.1638987773094; Wed, 08 Dec 2021 10:22:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7c4411c8-8bf6-36f1-36f8-1a7391c2a3d7@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: Reply-To: Yannis Guyon Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2021 19:22:42 +0100 Message-ID: To: Pierre Joye Cc: "Christoph M. Becker" , Ben Morss , PHP internals Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000002321305d2a694a1" Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Finishing AVIF support in getimagesize() From: internals@lists.php.net ("Yannis Guyon via internals") --00000000000002321305d2a694a1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > On a general principle, I understood that bundling libs should be avoided. > libavifinfo was designed more as a copy-pastable snippet than a library. Unfortunately AVIF is complex and avifinfo.c is lengthier than expected, although I believe 700 lines are still reasonable and way below a library's scale. I am not totally sure aviinfo is stable enough to be bundle either way. > What would you call "stable enough"? There is a test , it is currently internally fuzzed and was successfully run on more than 60k crawled AVIF images. I do not plan on modifying or testing it further until the AVIF format changes. The format will be widely used in a near future so i would rather allow it > if libavinfo js available rather than bundling it. What would be the pros and cons of using a javascript version of libavifinfo rather than the C one? Thanks, Yannis --00000000000002321305d2a694a1--