If somebody could test this .... It is possible that the code is wrong in the first place the function _XimResetICCheck() looks comparable but returns True in the second if()
re, wh Am 12.07.2014 17:53, schrieb walter harms: > > the if will return false as the function would do anyway > > Signed-off-by: Harms <wharms@bfs,de> > --- > modules/im/ximcp/imDefIc.c | 13 +++---------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/modules/im/ximcp/imDefIc.c b/modules/im/ximcp/imDefIc.c > index 143bd59..21f2f8f 100644 > --- a/modules/im/ximcp/imDefIc.c > +++ b/modules/im/ximcp/imDefIc.c > @@ -820,21 +820,14 @@ _XimDestroyICCheck( > CARD8 minor_opcode = *((CARD8 *)data + 1); > XIMID imid = buf_s[0]; > XICID icid = buf_s[1]; > - Bool ret = False; > > if ((major_opcode == XIM_DESTROY_IC_REPLY) > && (minor_opcode == 0) > && (imid == im->private.proto.imid) > && (icid == ic->private.proto.icid)) > - ret = True; > - if ((major_opcode == XIM_ERROR) > - && (minor_opcode == 0) > - && (buf_s[2] & XIM_IMID_VALID) > - && (imid == im->private.proto.imid) > - && (buf_s[2] & XIM_ICID_VALID) > - && (icid == ic->private.proto.icid)) > - ret = False; > - return ret; > + return True; > + > + return False; > } > > static void _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
