Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Hi Andrew,

I don't know any about the content, but I have searched, when the changes where made:

The part
    // #45465 Date needs with "+" a special handling: forces date type
              if( GetType() == SbxDATE || rOp.GetType() == SbxDATE )
                 aL.eType = SbxDATE;
moved from after the switch inside the switch with commit
1421b098ae19a10acb4836fa3752188cf7c52eb2
by Noel Power 06-Dec-2010

and the "#if 0" is a WaE fix by Tor Lillqvist 06-Oct-2011
8529da08517b41bd9317714e3216bb6d487b24ee

So I think, Noel should know.

Kind regards
Regina

Andrew Douglas Pitonyak schrieb:
I thought I found a bug, I decided to take a crack at fixing the bug,
and then I became confused because the bug appears to be intentional.
Let me explain:

Consider some comments related to Basic.

In the last release of OOo, the statement "Now + 2" returns a date /
time that is two days later than now. In LibreOffice, the same statement
appears to return the double representation of the same. Now, off hand,
this appears fine, until one tries to do something like this (which
works in OOo, but fails in LO)

DateValue(Now + 2)

This is no big deal if I am writing new code, because I can compensate:
DateValue(CDate(Now + 2)), but t kills legacy code.

I started poking through the code and I found
core/basic/source/sbx/sbxvalue.cxx

In the version of the LO code that I have, around line 1312, I see the
following:

case SbxPLUS:
aL.nDouble += aR.nDouble; break;
#if 0
// See 'break' on preceding line... this
// is unreachable code. Do not delete this
// #if 0 block unless you know for sure
// the 'break' above is intentional.

// #45465 Date needs with "+" a special handling: forces date type
if( GetType() == SbxDATE || rOp.GetType() == SbxDATE )
aL.eType = SbxDATE;
#endif

In OOo, the code ends at the break, but following the switch statement,
there is the following check:

// #45465 Date braucht bei + eine Spezial-Behandlung
if( eOp == SbxPLUS && (GetType() == SbxDATE || rOp.GetType() == SbxDATE ) )
aL.eType = SbxDATE;

So, it looks like someone did a code clean-up and the special handling
code was moved into the switch statement and then it was commented out.

I was so proud that I figured out where this occurred, but, I am a bit
stymied as to what happened here. It seems that I have almost nothing to
fix because someone did this intentionally, or was this left as is
because whomever made the change did not understand why the code was
there....

Sorry, just a bit confused as to what should be done. My opinion is that
a bug was introduced and that the fix is clear, move the break and let
the code run...

case SbxPLUS:
aL.nDouble += aR.nDouble;
// #45465 Date needs with "+" a special handling: forces date type
if( GetType() == SbxDATE || rOp.GetType() == SbxDATE )
aL.eType = SbxDATE;
break;

So, what am I missing?



Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.