To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=32269
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 19 03:27:51 -0800
2005 -------
First patch:
--- scaddins/source/analysis/analysis.cxx 2004-07-30 21:44:00.000000000 +0530
+++ scaddins/source/analysis/analysis.cxx 2005-12-18 18:57:45.798953944 +0530
@@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ double SAL_CALL AnalysisAddIn::getSeries
{
double fRet = 0.0;
- if( fX != 0.0 )
+ if( fX != 0.0 || (fX == 0.0 && fN == 0.0) )
{
sal_Int32 n1, n2;
sal_Int32 nE1 = aCoeffList.getLength();
Second patch:
--- scaddins/source/analysis/analysis.cxx 2004-07-30 21:44:00.000000000 +0530
+++ scaddins/source/analysis/analysis.cxx 2005-12-18 18:44:08.683174424 +0530
@@ -822,7 +822,9 @@ double SAL_CALL AnalysisAddIn::getSeries
{
double fRet = 0.0;
- if( fX != 0.0 )
+ if( fX == 0.0 && fN == 0 )
+ THROW_RTE;
+ else if( fX != 0.0 )
{
sal_Int32 n1, n2;
sal_Int32 nE1 = aCoeffList.getLength();
First patch is according to the discussion here. But I personally feel the
second patch is better ('cause 0^0 is undefined even thou pow(0,0) returns 1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
