To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=99655
                 Issue #|99655
                 Summary|connectivity: suspicious getNodeType() == SQL_TOKEN_NO
                        |T
               Component|Database access
                 Version|DEV300m41
                Platform|All
                     URL|
              OS/Version|Linux
                  Status|NEW
       Status whiteboard|
                Keywords|
              Resolution|
              Issue type|PATCH
                Priority|P3
            Subcomponent|none
             Assigned to|fs
             Reported by|cmc





------- Additional comments from [email protected] Thu Feb 26 09:29:41 +0000 
2009 -------
in connectivity/source/parse/sqlnode.cxx we have...

        OSQLParseNode* pCheckForNOT = pSearchCondition->getChild( 1 );
        if ( pCheckForNOT->getNodeType() == SQL_TOKEN_NOT )
            delete pSearchCondition->removeAt( 1 );
        else
        {
            OSQLParseNode* pNot = new OSQLParseNode(
::rtl::OUString::createFromAscii( "NOT" ), SQL_NODE_KEYWORD, SQL_TOKEN_NOT );
            pSearchCondition->insert( 1, pNot );
        }

is that "if ( pCheckForNOT->getNodeType() == SQL_TOKEN_NOT )" correct ?
I mean getNodeType returns a SQLNodeType and SQL_TOKEN_NOT is not one of the
SQLNodeType enums, is a sql token instead. Should it be, e.g.

+        if ( pCheckForNOT->getRuleID() == SQL_TOKEN_NOT )

?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]

Reply via email to