I want to play a media file from a memory stream using LibVLC like so:
//Ideally it would go like this:
LibVLC.MediaFromStream = new MemoryStream(File.ReadAllBytes(File_Path));
Of course this is a very oversimplified version of what I want but hopefully it conveys what I am looking for.
The reason being that I want there to be a good amount of portability for what I'm doing without having to track file locations and such. I'd rather have a massive clump of data in a single file that can be read from than have to track the locations of one or many more files.
I know this has something to do with the LibVLC IMEM Access module. However, looking at what information I've been able to find on that, I feel like I've been tossed from a plane and have just a few minutes to learn how to fly before I hit the ground.
See my answer to a similar question here:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/31316867/2202445
In summary, the API:
libvlc_media_t* libvlc_media_new_callbacks (libvlc_instance_t * instance,
libvlc_media_open_cb open_cb,
libvlc_media_read_cb read_cb,
libvlc_media_seek_cb seek_cb,
libvlc_media_close_cb close_cb,
void * opaque)
allows just this. The four callbacks must be implemented, although the documentation states the seek callback is not always necessary, see the libVlc documentation. I give an example of a partial implementation in the above answer.
There is no LibVLC API for imem, at least not presently.
You can however still use imem in your LibVLC application, but it's not straightforward...
If you do vlc -H | grep imem you will see something like this (this is just some of the options, there are others too):
--imem-get <string> Get function
--imem-release <string> Release function
--imem-cookie <string> Callback cookie string
--imem-data <string> Callback data
You can pass values for these switches either when you create your libvlc instance via libvlc_new(), or when you prepare media via libvlc_media_add_option().
Getting the needed values for these switches is a bit trickier, since you need to pass the actual in-memory address (pointer) to the callback functions you declare in your own application. You end up passing something like "--imem-get 812911313", for example.
There are downsides to doing it this way, e.g. you may not be able to seek backwards/forwards in the stream.
I've done this successfully in Java, but not C# (never tried).
An alternative to consider if you want to play the media data stored in a file, is to store your media in a zip or rar since vlc has plugins to play media from directly inside such archives.
I am doing some project related to image compression and I need a way to save the data lost in JPEG compression (like bits per pixel..). I guess I would need to build a custom libjpeg for that. Appreciate any suggestions/help on the subject (maybe even guidance to what part to modify in the source code).
Thanks in advance!
Edit: To clarify myself, I am not looking into embedding hidden information. I am looking for a method to get the data lost during JPEG compression. I am also OK with getting the data lost from re-compressing a JPEG image (from 90 to 80).
If you are in need to embed private data into JPEG bitstream, you might want to take advantage of APPn markers. There are few great things about them:
the image will still be readable and compatible with software out there
the format is simple enough so that you can leave libjpeg or your another favorite JPEG library intact, and add/read the data modifying the bitstream directly
JPEG File Interchange Format is using APP0 and APP1, you can read the details and there are still more available markers like APP2 which you can use for your purposes.
There's at least four steps where you can lose information in jpeg compression. I don't really know what you're getting at. If you want to measure the lost information, you can just compress/decompress and compare with the original.
I guess you want to encode RGB to standard JFIF, then you lose information in the color conversion, subsampling, after that you have to do FDCT and I don't think that is exactly reversible so you lose information in that step and then you have the quantization step. Unless you have quantization tables containing all ones you will lose information there also.
To sum it up:
Color conversion
Subsamling
FDCT/IDCT
Quantization
WP7 Mango is making it possible to save custom ringtones from apps. That's great and all, but not if your source material is too long in length (ringtones must be < 40 seconds or so).
I'm hoping it is possible to take an existing audio file (wma, lets say) and trim it by setting a start/end point, so you can export just a part of the audio for ringtone use.
I gather from other SO questions that audio encoding directly in silverlight is not really feasible. But I don't really want full encoding capabilities, just the ability to trim an existing already encoded file. Any pointers?
I was thinking about doing this as well (until I discovered that we have no access to the music already on the phone).
An mp3 should be pretty easy to do by checking the header (see here: http://www.mpgedit.org/mpgedit/mpeg_format/mpeghdr.htm) and then using the bit rate and frame size to calculate the number of bytes to copy using BinaryReader and BinaryWriter.
I haven't looked into wma but after glancing over the specifications it looks like it may be more complicated (specs: http://www.microsoft.com/download/en/details.aspx?displaylang=en&id=14995).
I found myself passing InputStream/OutputStream objects around my application modules.
I'm wondering if it's better to - save the content to disk and pass something like a Resource between the various methods calls - use a byte[] array instead of having to deal with streams everytime.
What's your approach in these situations?Thanks
Edit:
I've a Controller that receives a file uploaded by the user. I've an utility module that provides some functionality to render a file.
utilityMethod(InputStream is, OutputStream os)
The file in InputStream is the one uploaded by the user. os is the stream associated with the response. I'm wondering if it's better to have the utility method to save the generated file in a .tmp file and return the file path, or a byte[], etc. and have the controller to deal with the outputStream directly.
I try to keep as much in RAM as possible (mostly because of performance reasons and RAM is cheap). So I'm using a FileBackedBuffer to "save" data of unknown size. It has a limit. When less than limit bytes are written to it, it will keep them in an internal buffer. If more data is written, I'll create the actual file. This class has methods to get an InputStream and an OutputStream from it, so the using code isn't bothered with the petty details.
The answer actually depends on the context of the problem, which we dont know.
So, imagining the most generic case, I would create two abstractions. The first abstraction would take InputStream/OutputStream as parameters, whereas the other would take byte[].
The one that takes streams can read and pass the data to the byte[] implementation. So now your users can use both the stream abstraction and byte[] abstraction based on thier needs/comfort.
So we are sure that we will be taking our product internationally and will eventually need to internationalize it. How much internationalizing would you recommend we do as we go along?
I guess in other words, is there any internationalization that is easy now but can be much worse if we let the code base mature and that won't slow us down very much if we choose to start doing it now?
Tech used: C#, WPF, WinForms
Prepare it now, before you write all the strings in the codebase itself.
Everything after now will be too late. It's now or never!
It's true that it is a bit of extra effort to prepare well now, but not doing it will end up being a lot more expensive.
If you won't follow all the guidelines in the links below, at least heed points 1,2 and 7 of the summary which are very cheap to do now and which cause the most pain afterwards in my experience.
Check these guidelines and see for yourself why it's better to start now and get everything prepared.
Developing world ready applications
Best practices for developing world ready applications
Little extract:
Move all localizable resources to separate resource-only DLLs. Localizable resources include user interface elements such as strings, error messages, dialog boxes, menus, and embedded object resources. (Moving the resources to a DLL afterwards will be a pain)
Do not hardcode strings or user interface resources. (If you don't prepare, you know you will hardcode strings)
Do not put nonlocalizable resources into the resource-only DLLs. This causes confusion for translators.
Do not use composite strings that are built at run time from concatenated phrases. Composite strings are difficult to localize because they often assume an English grammatical order that does not apply to all languages. (After the interface design, changing phrases gets harder)
Avoid ambiguous constructs such as "Empty Folder" where the strings can be translated differently depending on the grammatical roles of the strings' components. For example, "empty" can be either a verb or an adjective, and this can lead to different translations in languages such as Italian or French. (Same issue)
Avoid using images and icons that contain text in your application. They are expensive to localize. (Use text rendered over the image)
Allow plenty of room for the length of strings to expand in the user interface. In some languages, phrases can require 50-75 percent more space. (Same issue, if you don't plan for it now, redesign is more expensive)
Use the System.Resources.ResourceManager class to retrieve resources based on culture.
Use Microsoft Visual Studio .NET to create Windows Forms dialog boxes, so they can be localized using the Windows Forms Resource Editor (Winres.exe). Do not code Windows Forms dialog boxes by hand.
IMHO, to claim something is going to happens "in a few years" literally translates to "we hope one day" which really means "never". Although I would still skim over various tutorials to make sure you don't make any horrendous mistakes. Doing correct internationalization support now will mean less work in the future, and once you get use to it, it won't have any real affect on today's productivity. But if you can measure the goal in years, maybe it's not worth doing at all right now.
I have worked on two projects that did internationalization: a C# ASP.NET (existed before I joined the project) app and a PHP app (homebrewed my own method using a free Internationalization control and my own management app).
You should store all the text (labels, button text, etc etc) as data inside a database. Reference these with keys (I prefer to use the first 4 words, made uppercase, spaces converted to underscores and non alpha-numerics stripped out) and when you have a duplicate, append a number to the end. The benefit of this key method is the programmer has a pretty strong understanding of the content of the text just by looking at the key.
Write a utility to extract the data and build .NET resource files that you add into your project for compile. Create a separate resource file for each language. In your code, use the key to point to the proper entry.
I would skim over the MS documents on the subject:
http://www.microsoft.com/globaldev/getwr/dotneti18n.mspx
Some basic things to avoid:
never ever ever use translation software, hire a pro or an intern taking that language at a local college
never try to create text by appending two existing entries, because grammar differs greately in each language, this will never work. So if you have a string that says "Click" and want one that says "Click Now", do not try to create a setup that merges two entries, or during translation, copy the word for click and translate the word now. Treat every string as a totally new translation from scratch
I will add to store and manipulate string data as Unicode (NVARCHAR in MS SQL).
Some questions to think about…
How match can you afford to delay the shipment of the English version of your application to save a bit of cost internationalize later?
Will you still be trading if you don’t get the cash flow from shipping the English version quickly?
How will you get the UI right, if you don’t get feedback quickly from some customers about it?
How often will you rewrite the UI before you have to internationalize it?
Do you English customers wish to be able to customize strings in the UI, e.g. not everyone calls a “shipping note” the same think.
As a large part of the pain of internationalize is making sure you don’t break the English version, is automated system testing of the UI a better investment?
The only thing I think I will always do is: “Do not use composite strings that are built at run time from concatenated phrases” and if you do so, don’t spread the code that builds up the a single string over lots of methods.
Having your UI automatically resize (and layout) to cope with length of labels etc will save you lots of time over the years if you can do it cheaply. There a lots of 3rd party control sets for Windows Forms that lets you label text boxes etc without having to put the labels on as separate controls.
I just starting to internationalize a WinForms application, we hope to mostly be able to use the “name” of each control as the lookup key, without having to move lots into resource files etc. It is not always as hard as you think at first….
You could use NGettext.Wpf (it can be installed from NuGet, and yes I am the author, but I made it out of the frustrations listed in the other answers).
It is hosted this github repository, and here is the getting started section at the time of writing:
NGettext.Wpf is intended to work with dependency injection. You need to call the following at the entry point of your application:
NGettext.Wpf.CompositionRoot.Compose("ExampleDomainName");
The "ExampleDomainName" string is the domain name. This means that when the current culture is set to "da-DK" translations will be loaded from "Locale\da-DK\LC_MESSAGES\ExampleDomainName.mo" relative to where your WPF app is running (You must include the .mo files in your application and make sure they are copied to the output directory).
Now you can do something like this in XAML:
<Button CommandParameter="en-US"
Command="{StaticResource ChangeCultureCommand}"
Content="{wpf:Gettext English}" />
Which demonstrates two features of this library. The most important is the Gettext markup extension which will make sure the Content is set to the translation of "English" with respect to the current culture, and update it when the current culture is changed. The other feature it demonstrates is the ChangeCultureCommand which changes the current culture to the given culture, in this case "en-US".
I also highly recommend reading Preparing Strings from the gettext utilities manual.
Internationalization will let your product be usable in other countries, it's easy and should be done from the start (this way English speaking people all over the world can use your software), those 3 rules will get you most of the way there:
Support international characters - use only Unicode data types in files and databases.
Support international date, time and number formats - use CultureInfo.InvariantCulture when storing data to file or computer readable storage, use CultureInfo.CurrentCulture when displaying data or parsing user input, never do your own parsing, never use any other culture objects.
textual data entered by the user should be considered a black box, don't try to break it up into words or letters, especially when displaying it to the user - different languages have diffract rules and the OS knows how to display left-to-right text, you don't.
Localization is translating the software into different languages, this is difficult and expensive, a good start is to never hard code strings and never build sentences out of smaller strings.
If you use test data, use non-English (e.g.: Russian, Polish, Norwegian etc) strings.
Encoding peeks it's little ugly head at every corner. If not in your own libraries, then in external ones.
I personally favor Russian because although I don't speak a word Russian (despite my name's origin) it has foreign chars in it and it takes way more space then English and therefor tests your spacing too.
Don't know if that is something language specific, or just because our Russian translator likes verbose strings.