No subject

"I think the real intent always was to actually look through all the
returned getSuperclasses(), and the error that superclasses past the
first one are effectively ignored has never been noticed."
---
 stoc/source/inspect/introspection.cxx |   25 +++++++------------------
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/stoc/source/inspect/introspection.cxx b/stoc/source/inspect/introspection.cxx
index 36f1acc..7d62578 100644
--- a/stoc/source/inspect/introspection.cxx
+++ b/stoc/source/inspect/introspection.cxx
@@ -110,29 +110,18 @@ sal_Bool isDerivedFrom( Reference<XIdlClass> xToTestClass, Reference<XIdlClass>
 {
     Sequence< Reference<XIdlClass> > aClassesSeq = xToTestClass->getSuperclasses();
     const Reference<XIdlClass>* pClassesArray = aClassesSeq.getConstArray();
+
     sal_Int32 nSuperClassCount = aClassesSeq.getLength();
-    sal_Int32 i;
-    for( i = 0 ;
-         i < nSuperClassCount ;
-         /* No "increment" expression needed as the body always
-          * returns, and in fact MSVC warns about unreachable code if
-          * we include one. On the other hand, what's the point in
-          * using a for loop here then if all we ever will look at is
-          * pClassesArray[0] ?
-          */ )
+    for ( sal_Int32 i = 0; i < nSuperClassCount; ++i )
     {
         const Reference<XIdlClass>& rxClass = pClassesArray[i];
-        if( xDerivedFromClass->equals( rxClass ) )
-        {
-            // Treffer
+
+        if ( xDerivedFromClass->equals( rxClass ) ||
+             isDerivedFrom( rxClass, xDerivedFromClass )
+           )
             return sal_True;
-        }
-        else
-        {
-            // Rekursiv weitersuchen
-            return isDerivedFrom( rxClass, xDerivedFromClass );
-        }
     }
+
     return sal_False;
 }
 
-- 
1.7.1


--------------080303070402050405090409--