diff options
| author | Michael Stahl <mstahl@redhat.com> | 2017-05-08 16:56:34 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Michael Stahl <mstahl@redhat.com> | 2017-05-08 17:21:16 +0200 |
| commit | 13d7778fc10638a145af7fb077688e032bd16f81 (patch) | |
| tree | 386949c45b447a8ebe956bab50c2060bb7e0e2da /sw/inc | |
| parent | f9f0b6ac12c5d6c73d9aa415a9de5e37105085d8 (diff) | |
tdf#70960 sw::UndoManager: fix exponential Repeat proliferation
In case of a multi-selection, the usual pattern is that the EditShell
contains a loop around GetCursor()->GetRingContainer() that creates N
"groups" of undo-actions, all of which are inside a SfxListUndoAction.
If that is then repeated again with a multi-selection, the result will
be N*N actions, etc. This is usually not an issue because most
repeatable actions are idempotent - except for the resource usage.
Prevent the 2nd step of the proliferation by introducing a flag in
SwUndo to do nothing in SwUndo::Repeat() that is set for all but the
1st cursor of the multi-selection in sw::UndoManager::Repeat().
(presumably regression from CWS undoapi)
Change-Id: I095258f6d57af6bcaa8a39747632422e8311e694
Diffstat (limited to 'sw/inc')
| -rw-r--r-- | sw/inc/undobj.hxx | 2 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/sw/inc/undobj.hxx b/sw/inc/undobj.hxx index 91185bbcded0..bfd7cf804051 100644 --- a/sw/inc/undobj.hxx +++ b/sw/inc/undobj.hxx @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ class SwUndo SwUndoId const m_nId; RedlineFlags nOrigRedlineFlags; ViewShellId m_nViewShellId; + bool m_isRepeatIgnored; /// for multi-selection, only repeat 1st selection protected: bool bCacheComment; @@ -124,6 +125,7 @@ public: static bool FillSaveDataForFormat( const SwPaM& , SwRedlineSaveDatas& ); static void SetSaveData( SwDoc& rDoc, SwRedlineSaveDatas& rSData ); static bool HasHiddenRedlines( const SwRedlineSaveDatas& rSData ); + void IgnoreRepeat() { m_isRepeatIgnored = true; } }; enum class DelContentType : sal_uInt16 |