#257 closed bug (fixed)
.Insert method - unable to specify Active listnode
Reported by: | Richard Lake | Owned by: | Thore Böckelmann |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 4.0-2015R3 |
Component: | Listtree.mcc | Version: | 4.0-2015R2 |
Severity: | minor | Keywords: | |
Cc: | OS Platform: | All | |
Blocked By: | Blocking: | ||
Release Notes: |
Description
The ability to insert a new element into a listtree structure using the list node of a referenced "Active" special value is either not inplemented or not working. Please can this be fixed ready for a R3 release, thank you.
Further info can be read here:
Change History (7)
comment:1 Changed 4 years ago by
Status: | new → pending |
---|
comment:2 Changed 4 years ago by
I really must second Jens here. Talking about a crash without providing a crashlog doesn't help anybody.
comment:3 Changed 4 years ago by
Milestone: | future release → 4.0-2015R3 |
---|---|
Owner: | set to Thore Böckelmann |
Priority: | undecided → normal |
Status: | pending → assigned |
Handling of MUIV_Listtree_Insert_ListNode_Active in MUIM_Listtree_Insert is missing completely. Instead it is treated as a real node pointer and hence causes the crash. But the Autodoc definitely states this fact:
INPUTS ListNode: Specify the node which list is used to insert the entry. Special values: MUIV_Listtree_Insert_ListNode_Active: The list of the active node. (n/a)
comment:5 Changed 4 years ago by
Please try again with the next nightly build.
And please provide the crashlog immediately if things are crashing next time. A bug report about a crash without the crashlog is worth nothing.
comment:6 follow-up: 7 Changed 4 years ago by
Thanks it no longer crashes, however sorry if I wasn't clear in my original ticket but I was hoping that you would actually go ahead and implement this. Would you be able to raise this as a enhancement?
comment:7 Changed 4 years ago by
Replying to djrikki:
Would you be able to raise this as a enhancement?
I have no clue what you are expecting from me to do or to change. It was a bug that it was crashing at all. This is fixed now. What kind of enhancement are you expecting now?
Please provide an adequate example C-source code here or even better a complete test case which we can use to verify your observations.