jonathans added a comment.
I wrote the first patch to be as minimal as possible and to be consistent
with the previous coding style. I therefore left the early returns in place.
I wrote the latest patch based on my interpretation of your (@kfunk) feedback
that it makes more sense to
kfunk added a comment.
Why did you remove all the early-returns? Was that the case before in one of
your earlier patches?
REPOSITORY
R239 KDELibs4Support
REVISION DETAIL
https://phabricator.kde.org/D2075
EMAIL PREFERENCES
https://phabricator.kde.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
jonathans added a comment.
Apparently updating the diff has had the side-effect of:
> https://phabricator.kde.org/source/kdelibs4support/ KDELibs4Support as the
repository for this revision.
Please excuse my bumbling - I don't know why that happened or how to repair
it. :(
kfunk added a comment.
In https://phabricator.kde.org/D2075#66751, @jonathans wrote:
> Agreed that would be more robust. In writing the patch I was seeking
consistency with those functions that already did the test, so those would also
need to be updated. Are there any situations where
jonathans added a comment.
Agreed that would be more robust. In writing the patch I was seeking
consistency with those functions that already did the test, so those would also
need to be updated. Are there any situations where the two tests would yield a
different result, ie d->native is
aacid added a comment.
Again we have a patch against no repo, so i don't even know how to read this
patch because i can't read the rest of the file.
INLINE COMMENTS
> kfiledialog.cpp:879
> +return 0;
> +}
> return d->w->okButton();
nullptr here and in other places
