Re: [Libreoffice] [PUSHED] inefficient emptiness check

I like it :-) Couldn't remember if you had commit access - so I pushed it for you. I assume you're using a regexp for these, and we might have a complete solution before long ? Thanks, Michael. Hey Michael, thanks for review my patch. I do not have commit access,

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] inefficient emptiness check

Sending for review. Great weekend for everyone. revol_From 8586c03973534c27c6b3fee0ed6dc57125438794 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kayo Hamid kayo.ha...@gekkolinux.com.br Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2011 23:40:55 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] [cppcheck] inefficient emptiness check --- extensions/source

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH][PUSHED] cppcheck variableScope

Many thanks for the patch! I just pushed it. For the next patches it would be great if you could use git format-patch to generate the patches from the commits in the git repos. That would save us quite some work picking up the email and commit message. Regards, understood, thanks to review

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] cppcheck variableScope

Another path for fixes some cppcheck warnings, sending for review. revol_diff --git a/svl/source/numbers/zformat.cxx b/svl/source/numbers/zformat.cxx index eff1a1c..8252d0c 100644 --- a/svl/source/numbers/zformat.cxx +++ b/svl/source/numbers/zformat.cxx @@ -3548,11 +3548,11 @@ sal_Bool

[Libreoffice] cppcheck inefficient checking for emptiness

From cppcheck: Using .empty() instead of .size() can be faster. .size() can take linear time but .empty() is guaranteed to take constant time Sending for review. revol_diff --git a/basegfx/source/polygon/b2dpolypolygoncutter.cxx

[Libreoffice] [PATH] prefer prefix ++/-- operators

Continuing the journey of cleaning cppcheck. ps: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-April/010562.html - I sent this path Friday, and how is common the community stop on weekend, I put this link so it does not end up losing revol_ cppcheck.prefix++.diff Description:

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] fixes for some cppcheck warnings

Just variableScope, sending for review. Question: until now my patches are just code changes, nothing adding some extra function, i really need to tell that my work is under LGPLv3+/MPL? If so, they are. revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] fixes for some cppcheck warnings

On Fri, 15 Apr 2011 16:25:32 -0300, Kayo Hamid kayo.ha...@gekkolinux.com.br wrote: Just variableScope, sending for review. Sometimes it happens ;-) patch annexed revol_diff --git a/vcl/os2/source/app/printf.c b/vcl/os2/source/app/printf.c index 06e75b6..9c65147 100644 --- a/vcl/os2/source

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] sal_{Bool,True,False} to bool, true, false.

Hello, I asked at #libreoffice-dev if we have to see some special condition to change sal_Bool to bool and so on, unanswered. Sending for review.diff --git a/svtools/source/control/ctrlbox.cxx b/svtools/source/control/ctrlbox.cxx index 9305e18..8420ebe 100644 ---

[Libreoffice] warning-free question

We have a lot of warnings from things that are not from LibreOffice, what do to with that? Fix it, create a patch and put it with us forever and keep updating it? revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org

Re: [Libreoffice] Problem with build environment: Gtk-linkage error

Hey, No I just installed the rpm libreoffice-bootstrap package with the following description: libreoffice-bootstrap - LibreOffice Build Bootstrap This packages provides the basic tools and framework for building LibreOffice using separate source packages. I did not install the source

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] cppcheck variableScope cleanliness

This patch removes some variableScope warnings from http://libreoffice.boldandbusted.com, sending for review. revol_ diff --git a/filter/source/svg/svgwriter.cxx b/filter/source/svg/svgwriter.cxx index 052a930..c0cd48f 100644 --- a/filter/source/svg/svgwriter.cxx +++

Re: [Libreoffice] Windows compiling

Hey, you can begin here http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Windows_Build_Dependencies revol_ On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 00:10:44 +0200, Albert Zaharovits albert.zaharov...@gmail.com wrote: Hi,     I am interesting in participating to your project, but in the past few days I've been

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] [PUSHING] translate german comments in /sc/inc

just to remember: some patchs translating german comments to english are not pushed, 0044 is one and we have others inside this list of patchs. revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] [PUSHING] translate german comments in /sc/inc

Hey, i took a look and i think that you can push - {0043,0044,0048}. On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:02:57 +0100, Christina Roßmanith chrrossman...@web.de wrote: Hi, I've pushed patch 1-3. Patch 4 only removes structuring //--- lines. I'm not sure if this is wanted. Maybe someone

[Libreoffice] Easy Hacks wiki page feature

How about add some extra information like '''Working on it''': {name|nick|or_wiki_page} at EasyHack page? With this we can see what needs more people and what not. revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org

[Libreoffice] ure cppcheck, variableScope.

Hi guys, it's minor change, sending for review. revol_ diff --git a/sal/osl/w32/diagnose.c b/sal/osl/w32/diagnose.c index 1990164..fb97a91 100644 --- a/sal/osl/w32/diagnose.c +++ b/sal/osl/w32/diagnose.c @@ -71,7 +71,6 @@ void SAL_CALL osl_breakDebug(void) void SAL_CALL osl_trace(const

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] some changes for better performance, writer.

Hey, Anyway, do not let me discourage you :) May I suggest that you look at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks ? There should be enough interesting things to try there. D. replying it helps me, I know a bit more now about what I tried to do and it's a good feeling, of

[Libreoffice] libreoffice.org

Hello, I have seen a new design at libreoffice.org and it's looks very good, congrats! But it seems miss set a blank background. revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] cppcheck changes at writer

Sending for review. revol_ diff --git a/sw/source/core/docnode/ndsect.cxx b/sw/source/core/docnode/ndsect.cxx index a7168c2..f93fe95 100644 --- a/sw/source/core/docnode/ndsect.cxx +++ b/sw/source/core/docnode/ndsect.cxx @@ -387,6 +387,7 @@ SwDoc::InsertSwSection(SwPaM const rRange,

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] some changes for better performance, writer.

Please, someone can review this? Thkz. revol_ diff --git a/sw/source/core/access/acccell.cxx b/sw/source/core/access/acccell.cxx index dbd1b51..2479c5c 100644 --- a/sw/source/core/access/acccell.cxx +++ b/sw/source/core/access/acccell.cxx @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ SwAccessibleCell::SwAccessibleCell(

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] some changes for better performance, writer.

Sending for review. revol_ diff --git a/sw/source/core/access/accdoc.cxx b/sw/source/core/access/accdoc.cxx index e7b8e8b..c382486 100644 --- a/sw/source/core/access/accdoc.cxx +++ b/sw/source/core/access/accdoc.cxx @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ void SwAccessibleDocumentBase::SetVisArea() } } -void

Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] some changes for better performance, writer.

On 08/01/2011 17:00, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: I' confused: -sal_Int32 nCount = xAcc-getAccessibleChildCount(); - -for( sal_Int32 i=0; i nCount; i++ ) +const sal_Int32 nCount = xAcc-getAccessibleChildCount(); +sal_Int32 i = 0; + +while(i nCount) { -if(

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] variableScope cppcheck at writer

Sending for review. revol_ diff --git a/sw/source/core/doc/doc.cxx b/sw/source/core/doc/doc.cxx index 1436f6e..73ad556 100644 --- a/sw/source/core/doc/doc.cxx +++ b/sw/source/core/doc/doc.cxx @@ -1246,7 +1246,6 @@ void SwDoc::CalculatePagesForPrinting( USHORT nFirstPageNo = 0; USHORT

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] cppcheck at writer, performance.

So, it's a small patch that I send for review because I do not know if it's ok to do what the cppcheck says to do. In this case, he says that for non-primitive types we can do ++test instead test++. My fear is if in the code really need to be test++, understand? revol_ diff --git

[Libreoffice] [Windows Build] Oh man, please, help-me.

So, hello guys, i'm trying to build LO at Windows and i know that anyone of us don't like to see it, but i really, --really--, needs help to do it because i can't, today, do it alone. The facts:  - LO Build Page not solve the problem, she says 'hey, my FRIEND, you only need to download your

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] Clean code at impress

Covering impress/animations/source/animcore/ and impress/sd/source/core/*, sending for review. Thanks, revol_. cleancode-impress.two.dirs.diff Description: Binary data ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] Last patch to clean code at writer [source/ui]

So, I'm happy, this patch finish my work to clean code around writer, everything inside sw. Sending for review (large patch). revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org

Re: [Libreoffice] [PUSHED] Clean code at writer [source/ui]

I can't see the commit at cgit, where is? I want to see the changes to improve my skills, see the changes. What wrong I'm doing? Better, what are wrong remove? revol_ Pushed with some changes. D. ___ LibreOffice mailing list

[Libreoffice] [PATCH] Clean code at writer [source/ui]

Covering source/ui/{app,cctrl,chrdlg,config,dbui,dialog,dochdll,docvw,envelp}, sending for review. Curiously 'ui' is the most clean I have seen. revol_ cleancode-writer.source.ui.initial.diff Description: Binary data ___ LibreOffice mailing

[Libreoffice] More clean code at writer [source/core/{docnode, draw, edit}]

Hello, sending this for review. I think that cleaniness is better than the previous. revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice

[Libreoffice] Clean code at writer [source/core/layout]

Hello, please can someone review this? I do not known exactly what I need to remove or not, so I'll known a bit more after someone reviewing it. So I'll be able to clean better and at once. cleancode-writer.source.core.layout.diff Description: Binary data

[Libreoffice] Build LO at Windows

i'm trying to build libreoffice, at windows, but i do not known what i need. i'm following this page, http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide/Building_on_Windows, and I have in my files the build, base, impress, writer and calc repos. cygwin + dependencies, perl +

[Libreoffice] SAL_N_ELEMENTS, where?

There are other places than writer, base, calc and impress repo? I'm not familiar with these many git repositories. revol_ ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice