and 11012?
That one certainly looks like a bug, yes.
But reading the code a bit, and especially this comment earlier in the
same function:
// LO internal gradient -> PDF shading type:
// * GradientStyle_LINEAR: axial shading, using sampled-function
with 2 samples
// [t=0:colorStart, t=1:colorEnd]
// * GradientStyle_AXIAL: axial shading, using sampled-function
with 3 samples
// [t=0:colorEnd, t=0.5:colorStart, t=1:colorEnd]
I think it is obvious that the missing break in fact is intentional
there. Testing would have indicated that, I guess.
(Whether translating LO gradients to PDF shading types in the way
indicated makes sense or not is a totally different question... Would
you want to work on that?)
What do we learn from this? Don't immediately assume that what you or
your editor think is a bug is not intentional. Instead, think harder,
and if necessary, test what the code actually does at run-time.
--tml
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.