ucb/source/ucp/webdav-neon/webdavcontent.cxx |   21 ++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

New commits:
commit 6f761939196eb0963c218b2ac9263f358f946675
Author:     Mike Kaganski <mike.kagan...@collabora.com>
AuthorDate: Thu Oct 14 17:05:53 2021 +0200
Commit:     Mike Kaganski <mike.kagan...@collabora.com>
CommitDate: Thu Oct 14 18:37:47 2021 +0200

    Finish merging two identical conditional branches
    
    The code in the branches used to do different things before commit
    26e6d4b05ab444e6a7529ffcac7fbe592fc94833, which technically made
    aProperties a copy of rProperties in both cases, only in one case
    there were some checks that didn't affect the end result. This was
    progressively cleaned up in commits e06afb0c9546ddcde1cedd75f59001396ac6fdf2
    and 39bbfa61653ba7c3cca0aed739559914c78edc89, and this one drops
    the last redundant bit.
    
    The only question that remains is: did the initial change
    actually intend this result?
    
    Change-Id: Id26d50f7f7bdfed3bfb436e0c8bbbf6b3a0dbf98
    Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/c/core/+/123524
    Tested-by: Jenkins
    Reviewed-by: Mike Kaganski <mike.kagan...@collabora.com>

diff --git a/ucb/source/ucp/webdav-neon/webdavcontent.cxx 
b/ucb/source/ucp/webdav-neon/webdavcontent.cxx
index c613926e445d..45907b8a53d3 100644
--- a/ucb/source/ucp/webdav-neon/webdavcontent.cxx
+++ b/ucb/source/ucp/webdav-neon/webdavcontent.cxx
@@ -1364,24 +1364,11 @@ uno::Reference< sdbc::XRow > Content::getPropertyValues(
                 // Only DAV resources support PROPFIND
                 std::vector< OUString > aPropNames;
 
-                uno::Sequence< beans::Property > aProperties(
-                    rProperties.getLength() );
-
-                if ( !m_aFailedPropNames.empty() )
-                {
-                    sal_Int32 nProps = rProperties.getLength();
-                    std::copy(rProperties.begin(), rProperties.end(), 
aProperties.begin());
-
-                    aProperties.realloc( nProps );
-                }
-                else
-                {
-                    aProperties = rProperties;
-                }
-
-                if ( aProperties.hasElements() )
+                // FIXME: Should m_aFailedPropNames be checked here? It got 
effectively
+                // ignored since commit 
26e6d4b05ab444e6a7529ffcac7fbe592fc94833.
+                if ( rProperties.hasElements() )
                     ContentProperties::UCBNamesToDAVNames(
-                        aProperties, aPropNames );
+                        rProperties, aPropNames );
 
                 if ( !aPropNames.empty() )
                 {

Reply via email to