Re: SvpGlyphPeer::RemovingGlyph() compile error

2018-02-05 Thread Don Lewis
No, I think there are consistency problems with what members of the object are used for what purpose. On 5 Feb, Peter Kovacs wrote: > If you speak for underlying Issues, you might refer to this? > I have stashed this change in > /main/basebmp/inc/basebmp/scanlineformats.hxx and I do not like the

Re: SvpGlyphPeer::RemovingGlyph() compile error

2018-02-05 Thread Peter Kovacs
If you speak for underlying Issues, you might refer to this? I have stashed this change in /main/basebmp/inc/basebmp/scanlineformats.hxx and I do not like the existing implementation. namespace basebmp { /* Current implementation */ namespace Format { static const sal_I

Re: SvpGlyphPeer::RemovingGlyph() compile error

2018-02-05 Thread Don Lewis
There is at least one other place in this code that uses the rGlyphData.ExtDataRef().meInfo to Format::NONE comparision. I think there are some deeper problems in this code. Unfortunately I won't have another chance to dig into it until the end of this week. Something else to think about is how

Re: SvpGlyphPeer::RemovingGlyph() compile error

2018-02-02 Thread Peter Kovacs
It does also not compile on gcc 7.xx So I did change the code and it compiles    if( rGlyphData.ExtDataRef().mpData != NULL ) But I think it has to be    if( rGlyphData.ExtDataRef().mpData != NULL && rGlyphData.ExtDataRef().mpData != Format::NONE) You can work around this issue in gcc by s