[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 --- Comment #9 from santo@hotmail.com --- (In reply to Julien Nabet from comment #7) > Eike: > does this patch make sense? > diff --git a/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx b/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx > index bc9dc416b1d5..a0d3fd14b0de 100644 > --- a/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx > +++ b/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx > @@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ void ScCellShell::ExecuteDB( SfxRequest& rReq ) > else if( nCol > aSortParam.nCol2 ) > nCol = aSortParam.nCol2; > > -aSortParam.bHasHeader = bHasHeader; > +aSortParam.bHasHeader = aSortParam.bHasHeader || > bHasHeader; > aSortParam.bByRow = true; > aSortParam.bCaseSens= false; > aSortParam.bNaturalSort = false; > > > I mean, we got > 388 bool bHasHeader = rDoc.HasColHeader( aSortParam.nCol1, aSortParam.nRow1, > aSortParam.nCol2, aSortParam.nRow2, nTab ); > which tries to "guess" if there's a column header but if the checkbox "Range > contains column labels" is enabled, and it's the case by default, we should > keep this and use the result of bHasHeader only if disabled. > What do you think? Is there any new on this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 --- Comment #8 from santo@hotmail.com --- Is there any new on this? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 Julien Nabet changed: What|Removed |Added CC||er...@redhat.com --- Comment #7 from Julien Nabet --- Eike: does this patch make sense? diff --git a/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx b/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx index bc9dc416b1d5..a0d3fd14b0de 100644 --- a/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx +++ b/sc/source/ui/view/cellsh2.cxx @@ -392,7 +392,7 @@ void ScCellShell::ExecuteDB( SfxRequest& rReq ) else if( nCol > aSortParam.nCol2 ) nCol = aSortParam.nCol2; -aSortParam.bHasHeader = bHasHeader; +aSortParam.bHasHeader = aSortParam.bHasHeader || bHasHeader; aSortParam.bByRow = true; aSortParam.bCaseSens= false; aSortParam.bNaturalSort = false; I mean, we got 388 bool bHasHeader = rDoc.HasColHeader( aSortParam.nCol1, aSortParam.nRow1, aSortParam.nCol2, aSortParam.nRow2, nTab ); which tries to "guess" if there's a column header but if the checkbox "Range contains column labels" is enabled, and it's the case by default, we should keep this and use the result of bHasHeader only if disabled. What do you think? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 Julien Nabet changed: What|Removed |Added CC||serval2...@yahoo.fr Ever confirmed|0 |1 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW --- Comment #6 from Julien Nabet --- On pc Debian x86-64 with master sources updated today, I gave a try with first file, I could reproduce this. It seems ascending order considers first row of the selection as the heading (so doesn't take it into account) but descending order doesn't. Then after having used descending order, ascending order doesn't consider anymore first row as heading. If using Sort dialog, we can see that first row of selection as the heading is the default and if we let this checkbox enabled and sort by descending then ascending, it sorts as expected, by keeping first row of the selection unchanged. So I think there's just a pb with descending sort which doesn't take first of selection as heading as default + disable it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 --- Comment #5 from Rainer Bielefeld Retired --- e1) already REPRODUCIBLE with Server Installation of Version: 6.0.7.3 (x64) Build-ID dc89aa7a9eabfd848af146d5086077aeed2ae4a5; CPU-Threads: 12; BS: Windows 10.0; UI-Render: GL; Gebietsschema: de-DE (de_DE); Calc: CL, Special devUserProfile e2) was still ok with Server Installation of Version: 4.0.0.3 WIN10 Build-ID 7545bee9c2a0782548772a21bc84a9dcc583b89; Special devUserProfile That's it from my side for now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 --- Comment #4 from Rainer Bielefeld Retired --- Created attachment 180673 --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=180673=edit New sample document d) some more results with new sample and Server Installation of Version: 7.4.0.0.alpha0+ (x64) Build ID b871abad383583f02eb49c7e49aeae01f6941072 CPU threads: 12; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19044; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: en-US | Calc: CL | Auto Colibre Theme | Special devUserProfile (probably identical with LibO 7.3) see in attachment Sheet 3 I'm a little worried. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 --- Comment #3 from Rainer Bielefeld Retired --- c) part of the effect is that contents of 'Sort key 1 - Column 1' contents does not show a table column heading, but contens of first row of the contens block (in reporter's sample document: contents of cell A1) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 Rainer Bielefeld Retired changed: What|Removed |Added CC||LibreOffice@bielefeldundbus ||s.de --- Comment #2 from Rainer Bielefeld Retired --- Some interim results with Server Installation of Version: 7.4.0.0.alpha0+ (x64) Build ID b871abad383583f02eb49c7e49aeae01f6941072 CPU threads: 12; OS: Windows 10.0 Build 19044; UI render: Skia/Raster; VCL: win Locale: de-DE (de_DE); UI: de-DE | Calc: CL | Auto Colibre Theme | Newly created l User Profile: a) Not related ro reporter's document, I also can reproduce that in newly created documents b) some preconditions are required that the effect appears b1) The block to be sorted starts in row 2 be) First row of the block is row 1 b2) column 1 of the block only contains not-numeric strings (means: no numbers) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 --- Comment #1 from Rafael Lima --- There's definitely something weird here. If you replace the contents in cells B2:B5 (the telephone numbers) by something else (e.g. 1, 2, 3 and 4), then sorting works as expected. For some reason, these numbers are messing with sorting. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[Libreoffice-bugs] [Bug 149519] SORTING issue
https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149519 Rafael Lima changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||108386 Referenced Bugs: https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108386 [Bug 108386] [META] Calc sorting related bugs and enhancements -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
