On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Ivan Timofeev <timofeev.i.s@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi there,
a nice patch from AOO:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1350585
given that the entirety of the patch is:
--- incubator/ooo/trunk/main/svl/source/undo/undo.cxx 2012/06/15
11:40:33 1350584
+++ incubator/ooo/trunk/main/svl/source/undo/undo.cxx 2012/06/15
11:42:45 1350585
@@ -627,7 +627,7 @@
// merge, if required
SfxUndoAction* pMergeWithAction = m_pData->pActUndoArray->nCurUndoAction ?
m_pData->pActUndoArray->aUndoActions[m_pData->pActUndoArray->nCurUndoAction-1].pAction
: NULL;
- if ( bTryMerge && ( !pMergeWithAction || !pMergeWithAction->Merge(
pAction ) ) )
+ if ( bTryMerge && ( pMergeWithAction && pMergeWithAction->Merge( pAction ) ) )
{
i_guard.markForDeletion( pAction );
return false;
Just reproduce it and mention i119400 in the commit message.
Note: in this specific case removing the unnecessary '()' [ indeed A
&& (B && C) <=> A && B && C ]
would be enough to make a distinct enough implementation, should
someone insist on the un-realistic concept that such patch rise to the
creativity threshold.
Norbert
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.