Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source

2011-10-27 Thread Stephan Bergmann

On 10/27/2011 02:54 PM, Terrence Enger wrote:

(*) For class types in general, the prefix and postfix operators can
 be completely different.  In my opinion, it is evil to do this;
 but the language allows it.


Sure.  Blind clean up can therefore cause trouble, in principle at least 
(as can so many refactorings in C++).


Stephan
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source

2011-10-27 Thread Terrence Enger
On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 09:16 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> 
> In general, and if the expression's value is not used, prefix 
> increment/decrement is preferable to postfix, as the former conceptually 
> avoids creation of a temporary that makes the old, unmodified value 
> available as the expression's value.

Just to be picky, if my memory of C++ serves, ...

(*) For built-in types, it is true that prefix and postfix
increment/decrement have the same effect on the variable.

(*) For STL iterators, I guess that the same statement is true.  At
least, I think that a violation of the symmetry would have
provoked my "Oh, eeeuuuw!" reflex so strongly that I would
remember it.  

(*) For class types in general, the prefix and postfix operators can
be completely different.  In my opinion, it is evil to do this;
but the language allows it.

Terry.

> 
> That said, you see both forms with more-or-less similar frequency in the 
> wild.
> 
> -Stephan


___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source

2011-10-25 Thread Fridrich Strba
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Actually, the post/preincrement change was an accidental one. The
problem I have is that the writeperfect source code lives in two
different places. The original code lives in
sourceforge.new/projects/libwpd as writerperfect module. That one
produces standalone converters for all the file-format. And that is
the place where it all started, kind of historical original place. I
normally fix that one and then use the same patch to patch the
libreoffice tree.

It is a bit hard for me to sync those things when the change is done
only in libreoffice and some larger changes are difficult to sync
using patches, so I just copy the corresponding classes from the
SF.net project and reformat the code according to the libreoffice
coding standards. This pre/postincrement change did not happen in the
sf.net repo and during the sync got lost. Although, just in the for
loops, I don't see much difference in the two.

I am thinking about making the writerperfect generators just a library
and use it as any other external library inside libreoffice build. But
that is not for tomorrow.

Cheers

F.

On 25/10/11 04:04, Kevin Hunter wrote:
> At 9:48pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Kevin Hunter wrote:
>> At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote:
>>> for (std::map::const_iterator
>>> iter = mHash.begin(); - iter != mHash.end(); ++iter) + iter !=
>>> mHash.end(); iter++)
>> 
>> Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment
>> operator merely a whitespace change? I seem to recall a message
>> or two on the subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking
>> them down just now. About 8 months ago, perhaps?
> 
> Kevin: open mouth, insert foot.  I apologize.  Just perusing
> commits, should've kept going.  I take it the pre to post is needed
> to "fix the build".
> 
> Kevin
> 

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk6me3AACgkQu9a1imXPdA+rRwCdFxwc/C6abM2x8gQ8yo1EqHhg
MHMAnA+MiUxLe1EFJCQyh2heenV0CmMw
=fnJH
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source

2011-10-25 Thread Stephan Bergmann

On 10/25/2011 04:04 AM, Kevin Hunter wrote:

At 9:48pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Kevin Hunter wrote:

At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote:

for (std::map::const_iterator iter =
mHash.begin();
- iter != mHash.end(); ++iter)
+ iter != mHash.end(); iter++)


Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment operator
merely a whitespace change? I seem to recall a message or two on the
subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking them down just now.
About 8 months ago, perhaps?


Kevin: open mouth, insert foot. I apologize. Just perusing commits,
should've kept going. I take it the pre to post is needed to "fix the
build".


This looks more like "fix the build" reverted more than was really 
necessary in this case.


In general, and if the expression's value is not used, prefix 
increment/decrement is preferable to postfix, as the former conceptually 
avoids creation of a temporary that makes the old, unmodified value 
available as the expression's value.


That said, you see both forms with more-or-less similar frequency in the 
wild.


-Stephan
___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source

2011-10-24 Thread Kevin Hunter

At 9:48pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Kevin Hunter wrote:

At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote:

for (std::map::const_iterator iter =
mHash.begin();
- iter != mHash.end(); ++iter)
+ iter != mHash.end(); iter++)


Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment operator
merely a whitespace change? I seem to recall a message or two on the
subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking them down just now.
About 8 months ago, perhaps?


Kevin: open mouth, insert foot.  I apologize.  Just perusing commits, 
should've kept going.  I take it the pre to post is needed to "fix the 
build".


Kevin

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice


Re: [Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: writerperfect/source

2011-10-24 Thread Kevin Hunter

At 7:24pm -0400 Mon, 24 Oct 2011, Fridrich Štrba wrote:

New commits:
commit 38cf494f90d19d1673773437cd52e8f0cfbf4eb5
Author: Fridrich Štrba 
Date:   Tue Oct 25 01:11:49 2011 +0200

White-space change to fix messy mix of different coding styles


[...]


diff --git a/writerperfect/source/filter/FontStyle.cxx 
b/writerperfect/source/filter/FontStyle.cxx
index 5743e1e..ac501c6 100644



  void FontStyleManager::clean()
  {
  for (std::map::iterator iter = 
mHash.begin();
- iter != mHash.end(); ++iter)
+iter != mHash.end(); iter++)
  {



@@ -65,7 +63,7 @@ void 
FontStyleManager::writeFontsDeclaration(OdfDocumentHandler *pHandler) const



  for (std::map::const_iterator iter = 
mHash.begin();
- iter != mHash.end(); ++iter)
+iter != mHash.end(); iter++)


Err, in terms of coding style, is a pre to post increment operator 
merely a whitespace change?  I seem to recall a message or two on the 
subject but I'm having a difficult time tracking them down just now. 
About 8 months ago, perhaps?


Kevin

___
LibreOffice mailing list
LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice