Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source
On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 09:16 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: In general, and if the expression's value is not used, prefix increment/decrement is preferable to postfix, as the former conceptually avoids creation of a temporary that makes the old, unmodified value available as the expression's value. Just to be picky, if my memory of C++ serves, ... (*) For built-in types, it is true that prefix and postfix increment/decrement have the same effect on the variable. (*) For STL iterators, I guess that the same statement is true. At least, I think that a violation of the symmetry would have provoked my Oh, eeeuuuw! reflex so strongly that I would remember it. grin / (*) For class types in general, the prefix and postfix operators can be completely different. In my opinion, it is evil to do this; but the language allows it. Terry. That said, you see both forms with more-or-less similar frequency in the wild. -Stephan ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source
On 10/25/2011 04:04 AM, Kevin Hunter wrote: At 9:48pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Kevin Hunter wrote: At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote: for (std::mapWPXString, FontStyle *, ltstr::const_iterator iter = mHash.begin(); - iter != mHash.end(); ++iter) + iter != mHash.end(); iter++) Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment operator merely a whitespace change? I seem to recall a message or two on the subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking them down just now. About 8 months ago, perhaps? Kevin: open mouth, insert foot. I apologize. Just perusing commits, should've kept going. I take it the pre to post is needed to fix the build. This looks more like fix the build reverted more than was really necessary in this case. In general, and if the expression's value is not used, prefix increment/decrement is preferable to postfix, as the former conceptually avoids creation of a temporary that makes the old, unmodified value available as the expression's value. That said, you see both forms with more-or-less similar frequency in the wild. -Stephan ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Actually, the post/preincrement change was an accidental one. The problem I have is that the writeperfect source code lives in two different places. The original code lives in sourceforge.new/projects/libwpd as writerperfect module. That one produces standalone converters for all the file-format. And that is the place where it all started, kind of historical original place. I normally fix that one and then use the same patch to patch the libreoffice tree. It is a bit hard for me to sync those things when the change is done only in libreoffice and some larger changes are difficult to sync using patches, so I just copy the corresponding classes from the SF.net project and reformat the code according to the libreoffice coding standards. This pre/postincrement change did not happen in the sf.net repo and during the sync got lost. Although, just in the for loops, I don't see much difference in the two. I am thinking about making the writerperfect generators just a library and use it as any other external library inside libreoffice build. But that is not for tomorrow. Cheers F. On 25/10/11 04:04, Kevin Hunter wrote: At 9:48pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Kevin Hunter wrote: At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote: for (std::mapWPXString, FontStyle *, ltstr::const_iterator iter = mHash.begin(); - iter != mHash.end(); ++iter) + iter != mHash.end(); iter++) Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment operator merely a whitespace change? I seem to recall a message or two on the subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking them down just now. About 8 months ago, perhaps? Kevin: open mouth, insert foot. I apologize. Just perusing commits, should've kept going. I take it the pre to post is needed to fix the build. Kevin -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk6me3AACgkQu9a1imXPdA+rRwCdFxwc/C6abM2x8gQ8yo1EqHhg MHMAnA+MiUxLe1EFJCQyh2heenV0CmMw =fnJH -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source
At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote:
New commits:
commit 38cf494f90d19d1673773437cd52e8f0cfbf4eb5
Author: Fridrich Štrba fridrich.st...@bluewin.ch
Date: Tue Oct 25 01:11:49 2011 +0200
White-space change to fix messy mix of different coding styles
[...]
diff --git a/writerperfect/source/filter/FontStyle.cxx
b/writerperfect/source/filter/FontStyle.cxx
index 5743e1e..ac501c6 100644
void FontStyleManager::clean()
{
for (std::mapWPXString, FontStyle *, ltstr::iterator iter =
mHash.begin();
- iter != mHash.end(); ++iter)
+iter != mHash.end(); iter++)
{
@@ -65,7 +63,7 @@ void
FontStyleManager::writeFontsDeclaration(OdfDocumentHandler *pHandler) const
for (std::mapWPXString, FontStyle *, ltstr::const_iterator iter =
mHash.begin();
- iter != mHash.end(); ++iter)
+iter != mHash.end(); iter++)
Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment operator
merely a whitespace change? I seem to recall a message or two on the
subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking them down just now.
About 8 months ago, perhaps?
Kevin
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source
At 9:48pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Kevin Hunter wrote: At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote: for (std::mapWPXString, FontStyle *, ltstr::const_iterator iter = mHash.begin(); - iter != mHash.end(); ++iter) + iter != mHash.end(); iter++) Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment operator merely a whitespace change? I seem to recall a message or two on the subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking them down just now. About 8 months ago, perhaps? Kevin: open mouth, insert foot. I apologize. Just perusing commits, should've kept going. I take it the pre to post is needed to fix the build. Kevin ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
