Apache OpenOffice (AOO) Bugzilla – Full Text Issue Listing |
Summary: | "if ( bOldVisible && !bOldVisible ) ..." seems meaningless | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | Draw | Reporter: | caolanm | ||||
Component: | code | Assignee: | hjs <hans-joachim.lankenau> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | issues@graphics <issues> | ||||
Severity: | Trivial | ||||||
Priority: | P3 | CC: | frank.schoenheit, issues, mkretzschmar, pavel | ||||
Version: | OOo 2.0.2 | ||||||
Target Milestone: | OOo 2.1 | ||||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||
OS: | Linux, all | ||||||
Issue Type: | PATCH | Latest Confirmation in: | --- | ||||
Developer Difficulty: | --- | ||||||
Issue Depends on: | |||||||
Issue Blocks: | 64084 | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
caolanm
2006-04-03 13:01:22 UTC
Created attachment 35465 [details]
patch to fix
Reassigned. Please handle. set target. Target OOoLater doesn't make sense for such fixes. if you do not have time to commit it etc, just approve and reassign back to Caolan. I disagree. Even if the code seems useless, the patch does not make things better. It can only make it worse. I have send this issue to Armin because he knows the code in question and only he can decide if removing the code in is correct or if the "if ( bOldVisible && !bOldVisible )" is just a typo. If it is a typo, the code you like to remove is still needed. wonder what I did, but I didn't send this one to armin so I try again. Armin, can you please have a look what happened here? can this code be removed? The comment in the line after the if certainly sounds as if the intended condition is something like: bOldVisible && !bVisible Anyway, back to lurker mode for me. AW: Changing target AW->FS: Please clarify if change in visibility needs to be handled or not fs->cmc: In fact the piece of code is a dead corpse, which can be removed. The original intention was surely if ( bOldVisible && !bVisible ) as pointed out by CL. However, the bug 110916 (from the comment below the line) reads: properties for control are not used immediately after change 1. open a new doc 2. insert a control 3. change the background color for the control via property browser =>> changes are not displayed until repaint Well, this obviously doesn't happen in today's builds, so we really don't need this code, so you're free to remove it. However, be aware that CWS aw024 (which is due for 2.0.5) completely gets rid of the complete class, so there's no real need to do this patch now. So, it's up to you what you want to do with it :) cmc->fs: Sure, does the same reasoning hold for the duplicate code in binfilter/bf_svx/source/svdraw/svx_svdpagv.cxx ? Can that chunk of redundant logic be removed ? or should it be fixed. (sorry, this comment lingered in my browser for 2 days :-\) In bifilter, the whole thing is dead (Yet another bunch of zillion lines of code in binfilter which is completely useless). That is, the SdrUnoControlRecs are a helper structure for associating UNO controls with their views, but binfilter, by addition, does never produce views. So, the whole thing there is completely obsolete (admittedly, finding the right place where to cut code might be tricky). So, remove it from binfilter if you want, it shouldn't hurt in any way. done in cmcfixes26 reassign for qa VERIFIED that code was removed in binfilter module seen in master |