At 12:41 PM 9/5/2001, Joseph Shraibman wrote:
>new patch:
There still seems to be an error with the same if-block.
! if (index>=-rows.size())
! internalIndex=rows.size()+index;
becomes
! if (index > -rows_size)
! internalIndex = rows_size+index;
Note that the original used >=, not >.
Also, why is the first edit being done? Granted it's faster in that it
doesn't null out the array of rows, but won't that have other effects? I'm
not very familiar with the code, so pardon if I'm off base on that.
//release resources held (memory for tuples)
if(rows!=null) {
- rows.setSize(0);
rows=null;
}
Peace,
Dave
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
