On 01/30/2013 03:13 PM, Libreoffice Gerrit user wrote:
commit 1ba8986446dbaa77c9aed6d141ee99da74bf1afb Author: Luboš Luňák <l.lu...@suse.cz> Date: Wed Jan 30 15:12:34 2013 +0100fix for the awkward OUString::replaceAll() behaviour Change-Id: I6ee919bb17ea7eb29cb9cfc0fc69d02d728d9a0f diff --git a/forms/source/xforms/resourcehelper.cxx b/forms/source/xforms/resourcehelper.cxx index a39f767..50cd74f 100644 --- a/forms/source/xforms/resourcehelper.cxx +++ b/forms/source/xforms/resourcehelper.cxx @@ -55,12 +55,10 @@ OUString getResource( sal_uInt16 nResourceId, OUString sResource = frm::ResourceManager::loadString( nResourceId ); OSL_ENSURE( !sResource.isEmpty(), "resource not found?" ); - // use old style String class for search and replace, so we don't have to - // code this again. OUString sString( sResource ); - sString.replaceAll( "$1", rInfo1 ); - sString.replaceAll( "$2", rInfo2 ); - sString.replaceAll( "$3", rInfo3 ); + sString = sString.replaceAll( "$1", rInfo1 ); + sString = sString.replaceAll( "$2", rInfo2 ); + sString = sString.replaceAll( "$3", rInfo3 ); return sString; }
Seeing this, that's the reason I've always been unhappy with such a replaceAll function: While it may appear "obviously useful," it easily leads to broken code (like if rInfo1 is "wanna bet $2 this doesn't work?", say, in the above snippet).
Stephan _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
