Re: [Podofo-users] [PATCH 1/5] is problematic (was: Re: [PATCH 2/5] PdfDictionary: Removed 5 unneeded lookups in AddKey and RemoveKey methods)

2019-01-22 Thread Francesco Pretto
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 01:05 Matthew Brincke > > the size of that member PdfVariant::m_eDataType was reduced to > 8 bits to save RAM space because PdfVariant objects are abundant > when using PoDoFo, not so much with the other ones you mention. > Therefore I don't agree with your proposal. The

Re: [Podofo-users] [PATCH 1/5] is problematic (was: Re: [PATCH 2/5] PdfDictionary: Removed 5 unneeded lookups in AddKey and RemoveKey methods)

2019-01-22 Thread Matthew Brincke
Hello Francesco, hello all, > On 22 January 2019 at 23:16 Francesco Pretto wrote: > > > On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 22:27, Matthew Brincke wrote: > > > > I retract my acceptance of [PATCH 1/5] because I've found some > > posts [1] to the mailing list which show that it's problematic > >

Re: [Podofo-users] [PATCH 1/5] is problematic (was: Re: [PATCH 2/5] PdfDictionary: Removed 5 unneeded lookups in AddKey and RemoveKey methods)

2019-01-22 Thread Francesco Pretto
On Tue, 22 Jan 2019 at 22:27, Matthew Brincke wrote: > > I retract my acceptance of [PATCH 1/5] because I've found some > posts [1] to the mailing list which show that it's problematic > (non-portable at least, but can lead to crashes). I'll instead > change the signed type pdf_int8 to pdf_uint8

[Podofo-users] [PATCH 1/5] is problematic (was: Re: [PATCH 2/5] PdfDictionary: Removed 5 unneeded lookups in AddKey and RemoveKey methods)

2019-01-22 Thread Matthew Brincke
Hello Francesco, hello all, > On 18 January 2019 at 15:05 Matthew Brincke wrote: > patch and the fix because I'd like to accept the first two > patches in this series today (commit them after testing with > different compilers on GNU/Linux). I retract my acceptance of [PATCH 1/5] because I've