On Wed, Oct 22, 2003 at 01:14:58AM +0300, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2003 at 07:17:22PM +0200, Andre Poenitz spake thusly:
>
> >
> > - if (point == last || chunkwidth >= width - left)
> > - point = (pos < i) ? i - 1 : i;
> > - break;
> > + if (point == last || chunkwidth >= width - left) {
> > + if (pos < i) {
> > + point = i - 1;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> >
> > No good.
> >
> > Andre'
>
> Grmpf indeed.
>
> Your patch is close but I think you need the following:
>
> if (point == last || chunkwidth >= width - left) {
> if (pos < i) {
> point = i - 1;
> - break; <-- *don't* delete this
> }
> }
> + if (i + 1 < last) <-- needed to prevent trailing empty row
> creation after wide inset
> + break; <-- OK.
>
> This works perfectly on the file José sent me.
Why this restriction to i + 1 < last?
The original code had an unconditional 'break'.
As John said: Be _very_ careful in this area.
Andre'
