[SOLVED] Re: About GraphicDisplayCacheEntry::IsCacheableAsBitmap/GraphicManager::ImplCreateOutput

On 12/07/2015 12:47, Zolnai Tamás wrote:
> Hi Julien,
>
> 2015-07-12 0:44 GMT+02:00 julien2412 <serval2412@yahoo.fr>:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Giving a try to tdf#47832, I noticed that there were similar comments in
> > these files:
> > GraphicDisplayCacheEntry::IsCacheableAsBitmap:
> >      487 // This function is based on GraphicManager::ImplCreateOutput(), in
> > fact it mostly copies
> >      488 // it, the difference is that this one does not create anything, it
> > only checks if
> >      489 // ImplCreateOutput() would use the optimization of using the single
> > bitmap.
> >      490 // If you do changes here, change the original function too.
> > see
> > http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/svtools/source/graphic/grfcache.cxx#487
> > and GraphicManager::ImplCreateOutput
> >     1112 // NOTE: If you do changes in this function, check
> > GraphicDisplayCacheEntry::IsCacheableAsBitmap
> >     1113 // in grfcache.cxx too.
> > see
> > http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/svtools/source/graphic/grfmgr2.cxx#1112
> >
> > But MetaActionType::FONT case isn't managed the same way:
> > In the first, there's just a fallthrough,
> > in the second one, there's some treatment.
> >
> > 1) Should we copy/paste the treatment in the first file?
> > 2) Should we remove the treatment in the second file?
> > 3) Should we just tweak the comment?
> > or simply nothing at all?
> The code seems good to me.
> GraphicDisplayCacheEntry::IsCacheableAsBitmap() is checks whether the
> metafile can be displayed as a single bitmap. In ImplCreateOutput() I
> see that MetaActionType::FONT is not handled as a bitmap (see
> nNumBitmaps increment), so it's useless to copy that code.
> If you check the IsCacheableAsBitmap()'s return value:
>      return nNumBitmaps == 1 && !bNonBitmapActionEncountered;
> you can see that non of these variables are affected by
> MetaActionType::FONT case in ImplCreateOutput().
> So I think we don't need any changes here.
Thank you for the explanation Zolnai! :-)
(You didn't mention about tweaking comment so I suppose it doesn't worth 
it too)

Julien