On 25/06/2010 08:53, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 06/24/10 22:51, Terrence Enger wrote:
>> This is about a sal_Bool rather than a bool, but I shall raise
>> the question anyway.
>>
>> It just happens that I was running OO under gdb, and the
>> following output had already caught my attention.
>>
>> Breakpoint 1, connectivity::OSkipDeletedSet::moveAbsolute
>> (this=0xa85faa14, _nPos=1, _bRetrieveData=244 'รด') at
>> /home/terry/OOo_hacking/DEV300_m83/connectivity/source/commontools/TSkipDeletedSet.cxx:170
>> 170 sal_Bool OSkipDeletedSet::moveAbsolute(sal_Int32 _nPos,sal_Bool
>> _bRetrieveData
>>
>> Is the funny value of _bRetrieveData sufficient grounds to create
>> an issue?
>
> Technically, it should be OK; a sal_Bool value == 0 represents false,
> while anything != 0 represents true. However, using anything but 0/1 is
> error-prone and probably dubious, so looking into it would definitely be
> worthwhile. (There is a slim chance that this is caused by compiler
> optimizations and is thus harmless, or that gdb displays garbage instead
> of the true function arguments, but the values for this and _nPos look
> reasonable enough to let you assume that the value for _bRetrieveData is
> correct also.)
well, the last time i found something like this it was just plain
uninitialized memory. i guess somebody should investigate where the value
came from.
--
Jody: "You realize your negative approach to everything is
self-defeating, right?"
Daria: "Well, it's nice to know there's _someone_ I can defeat."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
