On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 13:23 -0200, Kayo Hamid wrote: > So, it's a small patch that I send for review because I do not know if > it's ok to do what the cppcheck says to do. In this case, he says that > for non-primitive types we can do ++test instead test++. My fear is if > in the code really need to be test++, understand?
In those use cases it makes no difference whether it's a post- or pre-increment. It matters only when its return value is stored & used. I pushed your patch to master. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc <kyosh...@novell.com> _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
