[PATCH] Bug 48140 - [EasyHack] remove uno calls from xlsx import

[Daniel Bankston [danthedev]]

On 04/16/2012 05:13 AM, Noel Power wrote:
> On 15/04/12 05:20, Daniel Bankston [danthedev] wrote:
>> Hello, everyone,
>>
>> I have attached my patches for EasyHack 48140.  I have taken baby 
>> steps, so this just the first part of completing EasyHack 48140.  I 
>> changed WorkbookHelper::createNamedRangeObject and 
>> createLocalNamedRangeObject to return ScRangeData* instead of 
>> Reference<XNamedRanged>, and then I adjusted all callers.  You will 
>> notice I commented the old code out instead of deleting it.  I did 
>> this as this is just partial update for the EasyHack.
>>
>> I was able to successfully make sc with these changes.  "make -sr 
>> slowcheck" was also successful.  My own manual tests were also 
>> successful.  I tested by running calc and opening xlsx spreadsheets 
>> containing ranges with names.  I also created names for ranges and 
>> created names for cells in those spreadsheets.  I referred to those 
>> ranges and cells by name in other cells.
>>
>> Although my tests were successful, I still fear that there is 
>> something that I may have missed due to my current beginner level of 
>> understanding of the sc model.  I am eager to see what suggestions 
>> you all may have.
>>
>> When I have more time, I later plan to make similar changes to the 
>> database ranges and eventually remove all UNO calls in these methods 
>> where possible.  (School semester is still in for me and quite busy 
>> as it nears the end.)
> First please don't comment out code, it just makes the diff even more 
> confusing to look at, git already shows the deletions and annotating 
> that in the source really isn't necessary. Also, it's not a good idea 
> to have patches to patches especially for a standalone task like this. 
> Could you resubmit a cummulative patch  ( I think you can use git 
> commit -i for that ). From a quick look it seems the patch is probably 
> ok, one problem I see with a test document I have is that I now see in 
> the 'Insert | Names | Manage' dialog many many '__sharedxxxx' entries. 
> At a wild guess this would seem to step from the fact that the old 
> code used to set 'IsSharedFormula' on some named object entries and 
> your patch doesn't seem to do that. Markus or Kohei probably would 
> know more about the specifics of that stuff
>
> However I think the patch is most likely "nearly there" so don't give 
> up.  I think at least you have proved that you can download, build and 
> at least manipulate the libreoffice code which is the main purpose of 
> the easy hack :-)
>
> thanks for the patch and effort
> Noel

Hi, Noel,

Thanks for looking at my patch submission and for the helpful 
suggestions.  I have attached another single patch file that combines 
all the patch files and has the commented code removed.

May I please have a copy of that test document so that I can try to 
resolve the problem you mentioned? (When time permits, that is.)

Respectfully,
Daniel Bankston