[Libreoffice] Change in addition for date handling (intentional change??)

[Andrew Douglas Pitonyak]

I thought I found a bug, I decided to take a crack at fixing the bug, 
and then I became confused because the bug appears to be intentional. 
Let me explain:

Consider some comments related to Basic.

In the last release of OOo, the statement "Now + 2" returns a date / 
time that is two days later than now. In LibreOffice, the same statement 
appears to return the double representation of the same. Now, off hand, 
this appears fine, until one tries to do something like this (which 
works in OOo, but fails in LO)

DateValue(Now + 2)

This is no big deal if I am writing new code, because I can compensate: 
DateValue(CDate(Now + 2)), but t kills legacy code.

I started poking through the code and I found 
core/basic/source/sbx/sbxvalue.cxx

In the version of the LO code that I have, around line 1312, I see the 
following:

                         case SbxPLUS:
                             aL.nDouble += aR.nDouble; break;
#if 0
                             // See 'break' on preceding line... this
                             // is unreachable code. Do not delete this
                             // #if 0 block unless you know for sure
                             // the 'break' above is intentional.

                             // #45465 Date needs with "+" a special 
handling: forces date type
                             if( GetType() == SbxDATE || rOp.GetType() 
== SbxDATE )
                                 aL.eType = SbxDATE;
#endif

In OOo, the code ends at the break, but following the switch statement, 
there is the following check:

  // #45465 Date braucht bei + eine Spezial-Behandlung
if( eOp == SbxPLUS && (GetType() == SbxDATE || rOp.GetType() == SbxDATE ) )
   aL.eType = SbxDATE;

So, it looks like someone did a code clean-up and the special handling 
code was moved into the switch statement and then it was commented out.

I was so proud that I figured out where this occurred, but, I am a bit 
stymied as to what happened here. It seems that I have almost nothing to 
fix because someone did this intentionally, or was this left as is 
because whomever made the change did not understand why the code was 
there....

Sorry, just a bit confused as to what should be done. My opinion is that 
a bug was introduced and that the fix is clear, move the break and let 
the code run...

case SbxPLUS:
     aL.nDouble += aR.nDouble;
     // #45465 Date needs with "+" a special handling: forces date type
     if( GetType() == SbxDATE || rOp.GetType() == SbxDATE )
         aL.eType = SbxDATE;
     break;

So, what am I missing?

-- 
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info:  http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php