in line 3886:
m_nCols++;
leads to m_arColOrder being to small. a hotfix : add
m_arColOrder.push_back(m_nCols);//add sort order for new col
just before. But this might spoil sort order in some cases (not sure). The same problem occurs for m_nRows++ in 3963 i guess
in line 3886:
m_nCols++;
leads to m_arColOrder being to small. a hotfix : add
m_arColOrder.push_back(m_nCols);//add sort order for new col
just before. But this might spoil sort order in some cases (not sure). The same problem occurs for m_nRows++ in 3963 i guess