> On Aug 4, 2021, at 9:23 AM, Arrigo Marchiori <ard...@yahoo.it.INVALID> wrote:
>
> Hello Jim,
>
> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 08:09:11AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>>> On Aug 4, 2021, at 7:54 AM, Arrigo Marchiori <ard...@yahoo.it.INVALID>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Jim,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 07:39:14AM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>
>>>> Can you apply the below to your catalina branch build and see how it works?
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>>> b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>>> index dc67c5dc58..97c4d080f4 100644
>>>> --- a/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>>> +++ b/main/comphelper/inc/comphelper/extract.hxx
>>>> @@ -131,16 +131,22 @@ inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL extractInterface(
>>>> inline sal_Bool SAL_CALL any2bool( const ::com::sun::star::uno::Any & rAny
>>>> )
>>>> throw( ::com::sun::star::lang::IllegalArgumentException )
>>>> {
>>>> - if (rAny.getValueTypeClass() ==
>>>> ::com::sun::star::uno::TypeClass_BOOLEAN)
>>>> + bool bValue;
>>>> + sal_Bool sBValue;
>>>> + if ( rAny >>= bValue )
>>>> {
>>>> - return *(sal_Bool *)rAny.getValue();
>>>> + return *(sal_Bool *)bValue; // Why not just
>>>> (sal_Bool)bValue ?
>>>
>>> Are you sure about returning "*(sal_Bool *)bValue"? Are we not
>>> treating bValue as a pointer here, while it is a bool?
>>> To me it looks like returning either *0 or *1...
>>>
>>
>> Well, 2 things:
>>
>> 1. As you can see, the format is the exact that we've had all along
>> 2. We cast as a pointer to a sal_Bool and then get the contents of the
>> pointer (ie: re return the deref of the pointer, not the pointer
>
> Yes, but in your patch we are substituting a call to rAny.getValue(),
> that returns `const void *` with `bValue` that is `bool`.
> http://opengrok.openoffice.org/xref/aoo41x/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.h?r=24f6443d#163
>
> <http://opengrok.openoffice.org/xref/aoo41x/main/cppu/inc/com/sun/star/uno/Any.h?r=24f6443d#163>
>
> For this reason IMHO the cast makes sense the first time and not the
> second...
>
> I'd rather do:
>
> return *(sal_Bool *)&bValue;
> ^
>> Why we do that (cast as a pointer and then deref) is curious, hence the
>> comment
>
> I totally agree on this. It looks like type punning.
>
IMO, we should just return (sal_Bool) bValue
