[Libreoffice] [Fwd: Re: [PATCH] cppcheck warning in sw/source/ui/uiview/viewprt.cxx]

[David Tardon]

On Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 12:18:06PM +0100, Caolán McNamara wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 05:12 -0600, Noel Power wrote:
> > I thinking of cutting my fingers off, I seem to be completely unable to
> > reliably press 'Reply-to-all' 
> > email message attachment
> > > -------- Forwarded Message --------
> > > From: Noel Power <nopower at novell.com>
> > > To: caolanm at redhat.com
> > > Subject: Re: [Libreoffice] [PATCH] cppcheck warning in
> > > sw/source/ui/uiview/viewprt.cxx
> > > Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2010 04:59:04 -0600
> > > 
> > > Hi Caolan
> > > On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 10:31 +0100, Caoln McNamara wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 03:24 -0600, Noel Power wrote:
> > > > > Anybody have any idea or thoughts about that ?
> > > > 
> > > > Take the OSL_* family as the canonical ones, and typically replace the
> > > > others when them.
> > > You mean to remove all those DBG_XXXX ones and all the fancy logging,
> > > filtering support etc. or just the ASSERT(s)
> 
> I'd be tempted to just have the OSL_* family and remove the DBG_* ones,
> and convert the writer specific ASSERT, etc. things to OSL_*
> as well.
> 
> > > Does anyone use that
> > > dbgutil stuff? ( /me recall that maybe there is some extra usage ( or is
> > > it just annoyance ) using that with windows )
> 
> I know that *I* never use it :-)
> 
> > > >  Remove vos in total.
> > > sure but that part of a different task, although replacing any instance
> > > of VOS_ASSERT would be a start ( confusion reduction ) 
> 
> yeah, sure.
> 
> As an aside, I think dtardon was poking at the output from --with-debug
> builds and filing some patches as he was going along.
> 

Right.

I have used non-product builds a lot, at least for DEV300.

D.