On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Stephan Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: > Devilishly, it should actually happen to work just fine, as tools String and > rtl::OUString are layout-compatible.
humm... pretty scary... wonder how many other bug are accidentally hidden ? > > But the fix would simply be switching the implementation of > SbiRuntime::StepPAD (and possibly more) to properly use the SbxVarialbe's > OUString, and nothing more, or what am I missing? So I fail to see how that > relates to getting rid of xub_StrLen. One issue is that String already enforce the 64K limit (despite internally using a int32 for the len), whereas OUString, obviously does not... should we bother enforcing that limit ? including maintaining a distinction between 'variable-len' (Basic) String and 'fixed-len' String (which is not going to be trivial since they are represented by the same kind of object) while on the topic of magic c++ trick: does OUString* a = get_some_OUString_pointer() *a = a->copy(0,5); leak or not ? Norbert _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
