Re: [XaraXtreme-dev] Re: [XaraXtreme-commits] Commit Complete

[Alex Bligh <alex@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Did you do this for a reason? I certainly have written code that is 
> reliant on the string being empty after the call to this function (and 
> there is lots more that is also reliant on this fact). My code will 
> still work because the string is always empty before I make the call, 
> but I don't know for certain about of instances.

This is so DeclarePref when passed a string leaves the static
default value alone if the preference is not present (rather
than NULL'ing it).

I thought it was a winoil=>wxOil conversion bug, but it seems
winoil does the same thing.

The reason for changing it is because otherwise you can't use a
static default string, like you can use a static default integer,
which is both irritating and inconsistent. It looks like a bug,
but sadly one on whose behaviour people might rely.

If it's likely to break stuff, I can change it back. The case
where it would break things is where a non NULL string is used
as a default (as if the string is NULL, writing a NULL on
top of it makes no difference), the preference is absent,
and the result of it being NULL'd is something other than
replacing the non-NULL default.

Views?

Alex