[Libreoffice] inconsistency between rtl::OString/rtl::OUString and optimization opportunities ?

[Caolán McNamara]

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 15:41 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On Aug 31, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Caolán McNamara wrote:
...
> > I'm vaguely thinking of ... i18nutil x_rtl stuff ... hard-coding its
> > refcount argument to 0  or 1 and fixing up its uses to consistently
> > use one or the other public OUString acquire/noacquire ctors

done. Sadly half of the x_rtl uses were broken anyway, in the sense that
the rtl_uString was just used as a buffer, part of it *copied* into new
OUString and the original leaked. Changed the ok ones to use a
SAL_NOACQUIRE ctor and a x_rtl_uString_new_WithLength which creates a
rtl_uString with a ref-count of 1, and recovered a few of the
copy-and-leak cases which were easy conversions to what the original
intent was supposed to be, and converted the others to simple
sal_Unicode buffers

> > [1] with a loop, I suppose its no real optimization there to use memset
> > or rtl_allocateMemory for that case ?
> 
> Wouldn't hurt to use memset instead, I'd say.

done

C.