desktop/source/app/appinit.cxx |    7 +++++--
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

New commits:
commit 4897083c120fbe7ea2fbe14f0f7d2cb293b79fa8
Author:     Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]>
AuthorDate: Wed Nov 8 16:54:20 2023 +0100
Commit:     Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]>
CommitDate: Thu Nov 9 09:06:22 2023 +0100

    Move "Acceptor already exists" warning to where it belongs
    
    036ed05fe35044e49a91e12b6a8e5f36a5b9c4c2 "MWS_SRX644: migrate branch 
mws_srx644
    -> HEAD" had added this with misleading indentation, so it (apparently
    accidentally) did not pertain to the "aAcceptString was found in the map of
    already existing acceptors" case.  Then 
4acffc240b4845beedfe66eaa571b814d65e2e57
    "catch by const reference" fixed the indentation, but left the warning at 
the
    apparently wrong place.
    
    Change-Id: Ie73368bc1294e9b716e3fca75e12363cb6240fdd
    Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/159157
    Tested-by: Jenkins
    Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]>

diff --git a/desktop/source/app/appinit.cxx b/desktop/source/app/appinit.cxx
index 926ad1bfa6b7..6eca704c7fb9 100644
--- a/desktop/source/app/appinit.cxx
+++ b/desktop/source/app/appinit.cxx
@@ -138,7 +138,11 @@ void Desktop::createAcceptor(const OUString& aAcceptString)
     AcceptorMap &rMap = acceptorMap();
     AcceptorMap::const_iterator pIter = rMap.find(aAcceptString);
     if (pIter != rMap.end() )
+    {
+        // there is already an acceptor with this description
+        SAL_WARN( "desktop.app", "Acceptor already exists.");
         return;
+    }
 
     Sequence< Any > aSeq{ Any(aAcceptString), Any(bAccept) };
     Reference< XComponentContext > xContext = 
::comphelper::getProcessComponentContext();
@@ -161,8 +165,7 @@ void Desktop::createAcceptor(const OUString& aAcceptString)
     }
     else
     {
-        // there is already an acceptor with this description
-        SAL_WARN( "desktop.app", "Acceptor already exists.");
+        SAL_WARN( "desktop.app", "Acceptor could not be created");
     }
 }
 

Reply via email to