To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=56799
User sb changed the following:
What |Old value |New value
================================================================================
Status|RESOLVED |VERIFIED
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Nov 2 04:27:28 -0800
2005 -------
Code reviewed:
- Daniel, did you run any of the tests at
<http://udk.openoffice.org/common/man/draft/tests.html>?
- Starting to split hairs, for set it is debatable whether the current
pNew->acquire
m_p = pNew
pOld->release
or the hypothetical
m_p = pNew
pNew->acquire
pOld->release
would be better, given that acquire is a call into the unknown that can
potentially recurse...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
