[Libreoffice] [Libreoffice-commits] .: stoc/source
hunteke at earlham.edu
Tue Oct 4 14:01:23 PDT 2011
At 4:15pm -0400 Tue, 04 Oct 2011, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> Thanks a lot for the patch. 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.
Excellent. Was wondering, but don't yet know LO well enough to make
such declarations. Well, modulo any errors on my part, the logic I sent
in patch 1 should be the same as what was originally there, but I hope
easier to read/see for comparison/fixing.
Here is a second patch that compiles, /should/ respond to what you just
confirmed was the original intent, but is untested. (It was a random
drive by patching.) Specifically, I suppose it's obvious that this now
changes the semantics of it actually used to do. If you know how to
test it ...
More information about the LibreOffice