Hi,
On 2010-06-24 at 21:30 +0200, Eike Rathke wrote:
Anyway the change from BOOL to whatever is nothing that can be done just
with a script. That's different for e.g. USHORT.
Just a quick idea: define BOOL (or FASTBOOL) as some class that has
private ctors, conversion, assignment, bit
On 06/24/10 22:51, Terrence Enger wrote:
This is about a sal_Bool rather than a bool, but I shall raise
the question anyway.
It just happens that I was running OO under gdb, and the
following output had already caught my attention.
Breakpoint 1, connectivity::OSkipDeletedSet::moveAbsolute
On 06/24/2010 12:42 PM, Niklas Nebel wrote:
On 06/24/10 12:29, Mathias Bauer wrote:
The idea is so good that someone is already working on it. :-)
There is ongoing work to replace a lot of ancient types like BOOL,
USHORT etc. by sal_... types, with the exception that BOOL/FASTBOOl
will be
BOOL - bool will cause problems. Memory usage for new BOOL[n],
mixed use with sal_Bool (pointers, references), the occasional
special
value (SfxChildWinInfo::bVisible). Shouldn't we go the safe way and
change BOOL to sal_Bool instead?
Thinking again about suggestion I'm starting to see its
Am 25.06.2010 09:20, schrieb Mathias Bauer:
On 06/24/2010 12:42 PM, Niklas Nebel wrote:
On 06/24/10 12:29, Mathias Bauer wrote:
The idea is so good that someone is already working on it. :-)
There is ongoing work to replace a lot of ancient types like BOOL,
USHORT etc. by sal_... types, with
On 06/25/2010 10:48 AM, Herbert Duerr wrote:
BOOL - bool will cause problems. Memory usage for new BOOL[n],
mixed use with sal_Bool (pointers, references), the occasional special
value (SfxChildWinInfo::bVisible). Shouldn't we go the safe way and
change BOOL to sal_Bool instead?
Thinking
Hi.
What do you think about replace macro FASTBOOL with bool?
http://svn.services.openoffice.org/opengrok/xref/DEV300_m83/tools/inc/tools/solar.h#FASTBOOL
For now the FASTBOOL is defined as:
typedef int FASTBOOL;
Maybe we should change it to (or remove this macro):
typedef
On 06/24/10 11:17, Bartosz wrote:
Maybe we should change it to (or remove this macro):
typedef bool FASTBOOL;
Yes, best would certainly be to remove the typedef and change
occurrences of FASTBOOL to plain bool (watching out for potential
misuses that tunnel values other
+1 for removing this ancient thing.
Not for memory reasons (I doubt it would really make a difference), but
for code cleanup reasons.
I don't know how risky this is when it comes to the binfilter module.
If the old binary filters simply stream FASTBOOL variables, the document
format would
Hi,
On 24.06.2010 11:17, Bartosz wrote:
Hi.
What do you think about replace macro FASTBOOL with bool?
http://svn.services.openoffice.org/opengrok/xref/DEV300_m83/tools/inc/tools/solar.h#FASTBOOL
For now the FASTBOOL is defined as:
typedef int FASTBOOL;
Maybe we should
On 06/24/10 12:29, Mathias Bauer wrote:
The idea is so good that someone is already working on it. :-)
There is ongoing work to replace a lot of ancient types like BOOL,
USHORT etc. by sal_... types, with the exception that BOOL/FASTBOOl will
be replaced by bool.
BOOL - bool will cause
BOOL - bool will cause problems. Memory usage for new BOOL[n], mixed
use with sal_Bool (pointers, references), the occasional special value
(SfxChildWinInfo::bVisible). Shouldn't we go the safe way and change BOOL to
sal_Bool instead?
I agree with you Niklas. It will be much better/safer to
On 06/24/10 13:07, Bartosz wrote:
BOOL - bool will cause problems. Memory usage for new BOOL[n], mixed
use with sal_Bool (pointers, references), the occasional special value
(SfxChildWinInfo::bVisible). Shouldn't we go the safe way and change BOOL to
sal_Bool instead?
I agree with you Niklas.
On 06/24/10 13:52, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
Re memory usage: BOOL[n] and bool[n] would each be n bytes in size, or
what am I missing?
You're right, forget about that part.
Re mixed use with sal_Bool: haven't encountered this problem often over
the last years (and I liberally use bool instead
On 24.06.2010 12:42, Niklas Nebel wrote:
On 06/24/10 12:29, Mathias Bauer wrote:
The idea is so good that someone is already working on it. :-)
There is ongoing work to replace a lot of ancient types like BOOL,
USHORT etc. by sal_... types, with the exception that BOOL/FASTBOOl
will be replaced
Hi,
On Thursday, 2010-06-24 14:44:35 +0200, Mathias Bauer wrote:
In result I expect that most BOOL can be replaced by bool, while
some of them will become sal_Bool. The misused BOOLS that in fact
are 8 Bit integer variables(*) IMHO should become a sal_uInt8/16 just to
show that they
On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 11:32 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On 06/24/10 11:17, Bartosz wrote:
Maybe we should change it to (or remove this macro):
typedef bool FASTBOOL;
Yes, best would certainly be to remove the typedef and change
occurrences of FASTBOOL to plain
17 matches
Mail list logo
