To comment on the following update, log in, then open the issue:
http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=73908
------- Additional comments from [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Jan 29 02:46:13 -0800
2007 -------
2. wrt. the risk, I'm building up a patch of the changes necessary around the
place - and it seems, they are becoming more substantial, which is a problem.
Particularly in places where an attempt has been made to optimise string usage
already - eg. 'xmloff' constructs are used that make this harder.
What might be better would be to use a macro that had control over the OUString
construction too [ and resign ourselves to more 'global' OUStrings (?) ], ie.
RTL_USTRING_LITERAL("foo") -> either OUString("foo", sizeof("foo")-1, ASCII), or
OUString(mangled_macro("foo"), SAL_NO_ACQUIRE)
That way perhaps we would have more joy, and it'd be more compatible; it'd also
have the merit of being rather shorter than the existing OUString(
RTL_VERY_LONG_NAME_INDEED ("foo")) - what do you think ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply to this automatically generated notification from
Issue Tracker. Please log onto the website and enter your comments.
http://qa.openoffice.org/issue_handling/project_issues.html#notification
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
