Kohei Yoshida wrote:
Issue 35579 - sc-standard-filter-options.diff
Issue 26565 - sc-natural-sort.diff
I'm fully aware that the reason why the file format needs to be
extended in order for these patches to be included is because the
state of their corresponding UI control (i.e. checkbox, combo box
etc.) needs to be stored per named range etc.
But considering the immediate benefit of these two patches that a
large number of users will enjoy, perhaps a slight breakage in
functionality (not saving the state in the document) which the
majority of users will not even notice may be warranted?
Silently leaving out the new flags would mean that incomplete or even
wrong information (in the case of filters) is stored. But I could
imagine adding an extra check, so when the new features are used, no
sort/filter criteria are saved at all.
Or we can perhaps choose a middle-ground; we put the patches in with
the UI bits hidden (by use of #ifdef ...#endif), which may be unlocked
with the right compiler switch (-D) or a environment variable. That
way the patches get included, but the functionality is absent in the
default build (easier for ooo-build and good for the users).
Too much #ifdef always makes it easy to break the case you're not using,
especially with "warnings as errors", which is coming to sc soon.
Niklas
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
