To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=81612
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Sep 26 10:06:27 +0000
2007 -------
allow me to comment the WaE_extensions4.diff patch (some of this has been sad by
Pavel already, but allow me to bee too lazy to fiddle out):
- The change to MacPluginComm::~MacPluginComm looks bad, it removes essential
code (the call to waitpid, for instance), and will most probably not compile
in a
non-product version (--enable-dbgutil) or when compiled with debug (dmake
debug=1)
-The change in plugin/base/plmodel.cxx (2 occurances) should probably better be
if( rValue.getValueTypeClass() == TypeClass_STRING )
getValueTypeClass returns a css.uno.TypeClass enum value, so let's simply
compare it with such a value, instead of casting
- commenting out the guards in plugin/base/xplugin.cxx is definitely a bad idea,
they're in for thread safety reasons. What was the problem with the original
lines?
- scanner/sane.cxx
I'm not sure about changing
if( pZero->size > sizeof( SANE_Word ) )
to
if( (unsigned int) pZero->size > sizeof( SANE_Word ) )
Shouldn't the "unsigned int" better be a "size_t"? There are multiple
occurences
of this pattern, where I think the return value of sizeof-expressions should
be
compared with size_t instead of unsigned int.
- the two new cases in sane.cxx:863 might be worth an assertion. Not sure,
don't know the code.
- sane.cxx:987 perhaps should use "sal::static_cast< SANE_Unit, size_t >" (see
sal/types.h), or simply cast nUnit to size_t.
- The change in saldlg.cxx:442 seems to change the behavior, in that the three
additional cases now do something different than before.
A dedicated case-branch which does nothing (but raise an
OSL_ENSURE( false, "..." )) might be better here.
- removing "SvXMLElementExport aElemG" in svgaction.cxx:737 is a bad idea,
definitely. SvXMLElementExport is a class with non-trivial code in its
ctor/dtor.
I suppose the compiler complained about aElemG in line 767 hiding the aElemG
in line 740. In this case, simply rename the second aElemG.
- removing the "new ShutdownThread" in updatecheck.cxx most probably
also has unwanted side effects. You should clarify with the code owner,
or add an "(void)pShutdownThread" after the declaration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
