Hi all, in a recent patch [1] for String to OUString conversion I replaced the construction of an OUString from a sequence of OUStringBuffer.append to a single concatenation of OUString/constant strings [2]. Noel Power (whom I thank for the careful review, and is here in copy), correctly asks which way is preferred for such an operation: I don't know the answer, can some expert provide me an insight on this? I find OUString concatenation easier to read, but this could be not as efficient as the original code, or just undesired.
Thanks and kind regards Matteo [1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/4280/ [2] - OUStringBuffer aString; - aString.append('('); - aString.append(static_cast<sal_Int32>(nColMerge)); - aString.append(','); - aString.append(static_cast<sal_Int32>(nRowMerge)); - aString.append(')'); - return aString.makeStringAndClear(); + OUString aRet = "(" + + OUString::number(static_cast<sal_Int32>(nColMerge)) + + "," + + OUString::number(static_cast<sal_Int32>(nRowMerge)) + + ")"; + return aRet; _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
