https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124065
--- Comment #9 from [email protected] --- (In reply to Andre from comment #8) > (In reply to wujinlong from comment #6) > > Hi Andre, > > > > - Documenting clearly in sc/in/document.hxx that the returned ScRangeName is > > volatile, ie can change at any time. > > Checking that the calling code can handle this volatility is part of the > change, right? > I don't see this should be part of this fix. Two reasons, 1. There is such volatility issue existing in the original code for a long time. The original code uses Clone() to make a copy of the ScRangeName object, and at last the cloned ScRangeName object is set back to the Document object. The key point is there is performance issue in the code, and we are trying to fix that by not using Clone(). 2. If we use something like lock to resolve the volatility issue, it might introduce new performance issues. And we need to do more testing to make sure of that. So in summary, if you think we need to address this volatility issue more decently, I propose to do that in a separate task. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.
