Problem in Bug 93240

[Shreyansh Gandhi]

Hi Michael,

I just came across this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24221955/creating-a-unique-ptr-from-a-pointer
.
Will it be safe to use this method to push_back into m_Selectors?

-Shreyansh

On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 6:16 PM Michael Stahl <mstahl at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 01.09.2015 06:45, Shreyansh Gandhi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have been working on a patch for EasyHack 93240
> > <https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93240>  and I have
> > run into a problem.
> > All the changes I'll describe are in the sw/source/filter/html directory.
> >
> > *svxcss1.hxx , svxcss1.cxx , htmlcss1.cxx:-*
> >
> >   *
> http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sw/source/filter/html/svxcss1.hxx#201
> . According
> >     to the bug description, boost::ptr_vector<..> should be changed to
> >     std::vector<std::unique_ptr<CSS1Selector> > . aSelectors would be
> >     renamed to m_Selectors.
>
> yes
>
> >   *
> http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sw/source/filter/html/svxcss1.cxx#659
> >     . In SvcCSS1Parser::SelectorParsed, since pSelector (which is of
> >     type CSS1Selector*) would be pushed back into m_Selectors now and
> >     there is no conversion from a normal pointer to a unique_ptr,
> >     pSelector itself would have to be a unique_ptr. Hence, the
>
> that's not entirely true: there is no *implicit* conversion to
> unique_ptr, but you can explicitly construct the unique_ptr just fine.
>
> because the boost::ptr_containers have the same ownership semantics for
> elements, it should be safe to convert to unique_ptr in every place
> where an element is inserted into a std::container of std::unique_ptr.
>
> >     StyleParsed method's prototype would also be changed.
> >   *
> http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sw/source/filter/html/htmlcss1.cxx#696
> .
> >     Is another implementation of SvxCSS1Parser::StyleParsed.
> >
> >
> > Since SvxCSS1Parser inherits CSS1Parser, and the SelectorParsed method
> > is overloaded, changes are also required in *parcss1.hxx and parcss1.cxx
> > *, where ParseRule() calls SelectorParsed():-
>
> best to first finish the patch to convert the container and then do this
> refactoring in a follow-up patch:
>
> >   *
> http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sw/source/filter/html/parcss1.cxx#739
> .
> >     pSelector (which should become a unique_ptr ) is obtained from
> >     ParseSelector() (whose return type should also change) and then
> >     passed to SelectorParsed()
> >   *
> http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/sw/source/filter/html/parcss1.cxx#833
> .
> >     In ParseSelector(), pRoot, pNew and pLast would have to be
> >     unique_ptr s (initialized to nullptr). Lines 882, 894, 911 and 924
> >     would now have calls to std::move. The problem arises in the if
> >     block starting at line 936, where pRoot and pLast are checked for
> >     equality (which should fail for unique_ptr s) Also, pRoot and pLast
> >     could both be assigned to the object owned by pNew, which is not
> >     possible.
>
> it looks like it should be possible if pLast remains a CSS1Selector*,
> then use unique_ptr::get() to assign it.
>
> then also convert CSS1Selector::pNext to unique_ptr, so the first one is
> owned by pRoot variable and the subsequent ones are owned by the
> preceding one's pNext member.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LibreOffice mailing list
> LibreOffice at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
>
-- 
Regards,
Shreyansh Gandhi
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/attachments/20150901/39de26b1/attachment.html>