Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 02-Jul-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| >| I'l like this patch to go in, Jürgen.
|
| Go for it please all I see seems very resonable!
|
| >| + if (!recursive && (cached_bview == lbv))
| >| return cached_text;
| >
| > should really not be needed to check cached_bview for != 0, we are
| > just comparing two pointers, not dereferencing any.
|
| Well I got this by myself, but you spotted it good (I tend to put more
| then necessary security into the code, just a habbit we learned at
| university I cannot get rid of ;)
Og one thing that is implicit and which we could make explicit with an
assert is that we actually require lbv != 0.
I belive that an
lyx::Assert(pointer);
should be added to all methods that take a pointer as arg and that
require this pointer to be != 0.
an "if (!pointer) return;" is just band-aid and hides bug/real
problems instead of helping to find them.
Note Jürgen, this is not aimed at you, but is a more general comment.
--
Lgb
