build went through without compiler errors, but had to make some changes with guesses

[Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>]

Hi all,

I am proudly did finish a build tonight.

However I did2 additional Code changes. I do not trust my choice. :P

Both changes targetet to make the compiler happy, and to make a best 
shot correctness.

But I do not understand what I changed, I probably did it wrong. :-D


1) packagepixeliterator.hxx line 611

Error:

const int remainder( x(d.x) % num_intraword_positions );

Explanaition: x is an int while d.x is also int because d is a 
vigra:Diff2D. The compiler wants to caculate something but interprets x 
as a functioncall thus fails.

Fix:

I gave the compiler a valid formula. I thought maybe t is a dif and we 
want to move. I decided at random for negative move. Probable positive 
(+) would be more wise. Now that I think of it.

But I realy dont know f it is the right way.

const int remainder( (x-d.x) % num_intraword_positions );


2)svptext.cxx in SvpGlyphPeer::RemovingGlyph

Error:

if( rGlyphData.ExtDataRef().mpData != Format::NONE ) -> c++ compile 
error: ISO C++ forbids comparison between pointer and integer 
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2263681/c-compile-error-iso-c-forbids-comparison-between-pointer-and-integer>
Explanation: Format::NONE = 0, so I did not get the -fpermissive flag to 
work. So I looked at the code. An alternative that probable makes sense 
is to check at this point if something is at all in 
rGlyphData.ExtDataRef().mpData.
So instead of checking against Format::None I check now against NULL, 
Which the compiler accepted.

I will now try to find out what damage my guesses did. If you have any 
Idea how to check or any insight on where I changed code I am gratefull.


One last comment the code in both cases, I miss to see the beauty. I 
mean packagepiceliterator has the antipattern of Copy And Paste, while 
SvpGlyphPeer::RemovingGlyph tries to delete content from another class.
And that class looks generic, due to the void object I think rGlyphData 
itself does not know what it is storing.

I do not like both codeparts.

All the best
Peter

Re: build went through without compiler errors, but had to make some changes with guesses

[Peter kovacs <pe...@apache.org>]

I am currently reviewing when the code is used. If it is never used i would like to drop the code without replacement.

Will change the formula to x+d.x if it compiles again I check this one into subversion, only to be on the save side. 
Documentation will then be done via bugzilla.


Am 14. November 2017 23:42:39 MEZ schrieb Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>:
>On 14 Nov, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I am proudly did finish a build tonight.
>> 
>> However I did2 additional Code changes. I do not trust my choice. :P
>> 
>> Both changes targetet to make the compiler happy, and to make a best 
>> shot correctness.
>> 
>> But I do not understand what I changed, I probably did it wrong. :-D
>> 
>> 
>> 1) packagepixeliterator.hxx line 611
>> 
>> Error:
>> 
>> const int remainder( x(d.x) % num_intraword_positions );
>> 
>> Explanaition: x is an int while d.x is also int because d is a 
>> vigra:Diff2D. The compiler wants to caculate something but interprets
>x 
>> as a functioncall thus fails.
>
>I wonder how this ever worked ... maybe this code is never used so
>older compilers ignored it.
>
>> Fix:
>> 
>> I gave the compiler a valid formula. I thought maybe t is a dif and
>we 
>> want to move. I decided at random for negative move. Probable
>positive 
>> (+) would be more wise. Now that I think of it.
>> 
>> But I realy dont know f it is the right way.
>> 
>> const int remainder( (x-d.x) % num_intraword_positions );
>
>Based on the similar set( value_type v, difference_type const & d )
>code further down, it looks like + should be used instead of -.
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org

Re: build went through without compiler errors, but had to make some changes with guesses

[Don Lewis <tr...@apache.org>]

On 14 Nov, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I am proudly did finish a build tonight.
> 
> However I did2 additional Code changes. I do not trust my choice. :P
> 
> Both changes targetet to make the compiler happy, and to make a best 
> shot correctness.
> 
> But I do not understand what I changed, I probably did it wrong. :-D
> 
> 
> 1) packagepixeliterator.hxx line 611
> 
> Error:
> 
> const int remainder( x(d.x) % num_intraword_positions );
> 
> Explanaition: x is an int while d.x is also int because d is a 
> vigra:Diff2D. The compiler wants to caculate something but interprets x 
> as a functioncall thus fails.

I wonder how this ever worked ... maybe this code is never used so
older compilers ignored it.

> Fix:
> 
> I gave the compiler a valid formula. I thought maybe t is a dif and we 
> want to move. I decided at random for negative move. Probable positive 
> (+) would be more wise. Now that I think of it.
> 
> But I realy dont know f it is the right way.
> 
> const int remainder( (x-d.x) % num_intraword_positions );

Based on the similar set( value_type v, difference_type const & d )
code further down, it looks like + should be used instead of -.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org