Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|
Change-Id: I7805ac9bc6f8c0aa5ba4804777e7d7c2c29a78f3
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/52066
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
Change-Id: I884fe180be98fe29ddb7d2daf4c61f733236e8bd
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/51987
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
That little amount of code hardly justifies a separate library.
Change-Id: Idbb039f38258bc12759fcf6d29328e1afe7443ab
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/49391
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
|
|
Change-Id: I1bb683dc8d492db73c2f2cc07c67b4dcb75bc1fb
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/48558
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
Tested-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
The only effect SAL_CALL effectively has on LO-internal code is to change non-
static member functions from __thiscall to __cdecl in MSVC (where all other
functions are __cdecl by default, anyway). (For 3rd-party code, it could be
argued that SAL_CALL is useful on function declarations in the URE stable
interface other than non-static member functions, too, in case 3rd-party code
uses a compiler switch to change the default calling convention to something
other than __cdecl. But loplugin:salcall exempts the URE stable interface,
anyway.)
One could argue that SAL_CALL, even if today it effectively only affects non-
static member functions in MSVC, could be extended in the future to affect more
functions on more platforms. However, the current code would already not
support that. For example, 3af500580b1c82eabd60335c9ebc458a3f68850c
"loplugin:salcall fix functions" changed FrameControl_createInstance in
UnoControls/source/base/registercontrols.cxx to no longer be SAL_CALL, even
though its address (in ctl_component_getFacrory, in the same file) is passed to
cppuhelper::createSingleFactory as an argument of type
cppu::ComponentInstantiation, which is a pointer to SAL_CALL function.
Change-Id: I3acbf7314a3d7868ed70e35bb5c47bc11a0b7ff6
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/46436
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
|
|
since cdecl is the default calling convention on Windows for
such functions, the annotation is redundant.
Change-Id: I1a85fa27e5ac65ce0e04a19bde74c90800ffaa2d
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/46164
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
Change-Id: I9c3eca51fec52a255fcf280fe4e5ecc2ebbee5f3
|
|
...instead of implicitly next to the including file, in preparation of
loplugin:includeform
Change-Id: I81e3cd2dee707168064ff729f47e525b29bea43b
|
|
Not going via UNO means explicit interface casting can be avoided.
Change-Id: I4fa2db810cade787913bca222530405d8d2eb6a9
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/42573
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
Change-Id: I50c89b310da84e3d6a47b18114c20b4c35628a50
|
|
The only implementation of css::xml::crypto::XXMLSignatureTemplate is
XMLSignatureTemplateImpl, so work with that directly instead of going
via UNO.
Change-Id: I85e2169a909b689620c2ce125a9653f9a6696f45
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/40950
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
Change-Id: Ibb940c2a7098313dfa282734894b1abc1ac40bc2
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/40489
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
seems I got one of the checks wrong, and was missing a bunch of stuff
Change-Id: I2c662fc4e735f8d6cbe56c6f82906a60a580331b
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/40481
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
Change-Id: I41f153af55262d201c0fb024460de0e9f1c14670
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/40472
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
Sadly we only know whether its a OpenPGP or X509 signature during
parsing, so we need to switch the implementation mid-way
Change-Id: Ib48a9da0105de62cfecda095df8c154b59ba8c40
|
|
Change-Id: I680bd57a492fe04dc98f2f61ff292e44e544a483
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/37451
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Thorsten Behrens <Thorsten.Behrens@CIB.de>
|
|
Change-Id: I5c89a47e658ae4ad2b0cdfcdb4988c4b79353085
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/35413
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
...(for now, from LIBO_INTERNAL_CODE only). See the mail thread starting at
<https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2017-January/076665.html>
"Dynamic Exception Specifications" for details.
Most changes have been done automatically by the rewriting loplugin:dynexcspec
(after enabling the rewriting mode, to be committed shortly). The way it only
removes exception specs from declarations if it also sees a definition, it
identified some dead declarations-w/o-definitions (that have been removed
manually) and some cases where a definition appeared in multiple include files
(which have also been cleaned up manually). There's also been cases of macro
paramters (that were used to abstract over exception specs) that have become
unused now (and been removed).
Furthermore, some code needed to be cleaned up manually
(avmedia/source/quicktime/ and connectivity/source/drivers/kab/), as I had no
configurations available that would actually build that code. Missing @throws
documentation has not been applied in such manual clean-up.
Change-Id: I3408691256c9b0c12bc5332de976743626e13960
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/33574
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
Reviewed-by: Stephan Bergmann <sbergman@redhat.com>
|
|
Change-Id: I2447c028add359952e4bd36dbdc1d5431fe48104
|
|
Change-Id: I9611511cb3480734dea3c3cbaf0d659071366ad1
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/32873
Reviewed-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
Tested-by: Noel Grandin <noel.grandin@collabora.co.uk>
|
|
Going via UNO for a class in the same module is an overkill.
Change-Id: I3a24bc770e40be5b0a6fc34206e92f968de060ae
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/32271
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
|
|
Going via UNO for a class in the same module is an overkill.
Change-Id: I577660513022fde1576df19b412fcdb1ee2ad041
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/31461
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
|
|
Going via UNO for a class in the same module sounds like an overkill.
Change-Id: Iaa5b31d1b888c8d3f1c9b47ee787504191ce3d7d
Reviewed-on: https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/31148
Reviewed-by: Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@collabora.co.uk>
Tested-by: Jenkins <ci@libreoffice.org>
|