On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Tyler Laing<trinioler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:ah, yeah. Good to keep that coupling low. I guess it would need one
> It could be. That, however, increases the coupling between the sound
> subsystem and the movie module. If you want me to, I will, but I would need
> to consider how best to make sure the sound subsystem can be replaced on
> demand.
>
of those for each movie instance.
Or for now, we can just limit movie playback to one at a time... and
change it later to support multiple movies in the future. That's the
main use case anyway.
ok, that sounds good.
> And then for separate movie screens, it would be entirely possible if you
> just give different surfaces to each movie object. You're correct there. I'm
> going to add a MovieInfo object, which will do all the same sort of setup
> stuff, but can give the user info about their movie file, for dynamic use.
yeah, I think just raising an exception if the supplied surface is the
> As well, there is an issue if you give a surface to the movie object that
> does not have the same aspect ratio as the video file. This is what was
> causing the weird image corruption issues before. I'm not sure how I can
> programmatically solve that, beyond maybe throwing an exception if the given
> surface does not have the same aspect ratio.
>
wrong size is fine. That's something that could be added later
really.