On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 14:39 +0200, Lubos Lunak wrote: > On Thursday 05 of April 2012, Caolán McNamara wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-04-05 at 08:43 +0300, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > > > > if (foo.equalsAsciiL(RTL_CONSTASCII_STRINGPARAM("XXXXX"))) > > > > if (foo.equals(rtl::OUString(RTL_CONSTASCII_USTRINGPARAM("XXXXX")))) > > > > > > > > can be written as > > > > > > > > if( foo == "XXXXX" ) > > > > > > This has to be the biggest improvement in OOo/LO codebase readability > > > ever! Incredibly nice! > > > > Look good. I wonder though if its only me that would prefer not to have > > an overloaded operator== and to force bar.equalsfoo(""). > > Quite possibly yes :). Why would you want the explicit less convenient way?
Cause I worry that someone's going to end up comparing string literals to each other under some conversion like -#define FOO rtl::OUString(..."foo"...) +#define FOO "foo" -#define BAR rtl::OUString(..."bar"...) +#define BAR "bar" if (FOO == BAR) C. _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice