Forgot to add PATCH to the subject line.
August Sodora
aug...@gmail.com
(201) 280-8138
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:01 PM, August Sodora wrote:
> Thanks Markus!
>
> I've attached a new patch that includes some tests for the BASIC
> scanner. Most of the test cases are just to get an idea of how th
Thanks Markus!
I've attached a new patch that includes some tests for the BASIC
scanner. Most of the test cases are just to get an idea of how the
scanner handles certain situations but I tried to make sure I included
ones that specifically trigger where the GetBufferAccess was.
August Sodora
aug
Hello August,
as promised on IRC this patch resolves all linking problems.
If you have any more problems feel free to ask here or on IRC.
Thanks a lot for your work.
Markus
From 4dff8234882606797b41b99fbc9d419b72c1f8ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: August Sodora
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:54:2
I'm sure these things are easier to troubleshoot when I remember to
include the patch :)
August Sodora
aug...@gmail.com
(201) 280-8138
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:01 AM, August Sodora wrote:
>> I am terribly sorry, but got distracted by the LibreOffice conference,
>> and was not able to have a
> I am terribly sorry, but got distracted by the LibreOffice conference,
> and was not able to have a look at your updated patch :-(
No worries :) It gave me a lot of good time to read the code and try
to understand the problem better.
> If you have any tests now, would be great to send them too,
Hi August,
On 2011-10-07 at 16:01 -0400, August Sodora wrote:
> Has anybody had a chance to review this patch? I'm really interested
> in writing some tests for basic and I'd like to make sure that these
> types of changes are on the right track.
I am terribly sorry, but got distracted by the Li
Has anybody had a chance to review this patch? I'm really interested
in writing some tests for basic and I'd like to make sure that these
types of changes are on the right track.
August Sodora
aug...@gmail.com
(201) 280-8138
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 3:48 PM, August Sodora wrote:
> I've attached
I've attached a revised patch that should fix the pLine issue. The
assignment to pLine is now redundant and all the checks in pLine can
probably be more appropriately expressed in terms of aLine anyway. I'm
not sure how ToUpperAscii affects this patch, do you mind explaining a
little further?
Augu
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 10:57 +0200, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
> BTW, another horror in the original code is:
>
> > ch1 = aSym.ToUpperAscii().GetBuffer()[0];
>
> ie. we convert the entire string to upper case, and then throw all that
> away but the first char.
[Byte]String::ToUpperAscii, see tools/sou
Hi August,
On 2011-10-02 at 20:00 -0400, August Sodora wrote:
> Apparently the issue was that I actually wasn't using the parameter :)
> I've attached a preliminary patch (my first!) for review.
Great stuff, thank you for that! :-) Unfortunately the original code is
a kind of horror, and there
Apparently the issue was that I actually wasn't using the parameter :)
I've attached a preliminary patch (my first!) for review.
August Sodora
aug...@gmail.com
(201) 280-8138
On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 3:16 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> It sounds at least reasonable to me. The normal thing is to add
11 matches
Mail list logo
