On Aug 23, 2011, at 5:09 PM, Lionel Elie Mamane wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:53:59PM +0200, Eike Rathke wrote: >> On Monday, 2011-08-22 15:30:04 -0400, Kohei Yoshida wrote: > >>> What this tells me is that, we can't change OPropertySetHelper >>> implementation, at least not in a way that changes its virtual >>> function table (until LibreOffice 4 I suppose), which cripples us >>> since there are still opportunities to improve that code. > >> There may be a way out of it: _append_ the new virtual function >> after all existing. This works only though if new code using it is >> not mixed with old implementation. Old code using the new >> implementation shouldn't see a problem as it expects the vtable to >> be shorter, unless someone derived from OPropertySetHelper then >> there may be problems again. Maybe too vague. > > And won't *other* stuff be moved around? For example, because the > vtable is longer, m_pReserved is at another offset in the class, > breaking ABI again?
The offset of m_pReserved would not be affected by changes to the vtable's size (with de-facto standard C++ ABIs). But what could indeed break is if old code (that is not recompiled) derives classes from OPropertySetHelper---which is likely, given that OPropertySetHelper is designed to be derived from. -Stephan _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
