https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128812
Julien Nabet <serval2...@yahoo.fr> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC|serval2...@yahoo.fr |
--- Comment #12 from Julien Nabet <serval2...@yahoo.fr> ---
(In reply to Eike Rathke from comment #11)
> (In reply to Julien Nabet from comment #7)
> > A bit weird, isn't it?
> Yeah looks a bit odd. A better approach probably would be to let places that
> expect a single ScQueryEntry::Item in an ScQueryEntry already force that in
> a strategic place (i.e. here in the ScQueryCellIterator ctor) and remove the
> check and forcing 1 element from ScQueryEntry::GetQueryItem(), which would
> need inspecting all places that use it first. Knowing that there is exactly
> one item anyway the if (rItem.mbMatchEmpty...) could omit the extra check of
> rEntry.GetQueryItems().size() == 1. Altogether eliminating two size() calls
> per call that could squeeze those 3% of ScQueryCellIterator::GetThis().
Thank you for your detailed feedback. It's not an easyhack (at least for me)
then and it concerns only 3% anyway.
Can't help here => uncc myself.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug._______________________________________________
Libreoffice-bugs mailing list
Libreoffice-bugs@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-bugs
