[PATCH] Generic Lambdas: A first step
klimek at google.com
Thu Aug 22 07:40:46 PDT 2013
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Faisalv <faisalv at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ack! Sorry!
> This patch has been silently roasting in review limbo for over a month
> (after requested technical changes were made) and a mistaken interpretation
> of the silence allowed my impatience to get the better of me.
> My deepest apologies. Shall not happen again. Will continue the wait.
I have a patch out to update the dev policy with more constructive ideas on
how to speed up reviews - as it can be quite frustrating at times (we've
all been there ;)
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 22, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Manuel Klimek <klimek at google.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Faisal Vali <faisalv at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I plan on committing this patch later today - unless a reviewer needs
>> more time or anyone has a good reason for me not to do so ...
>> thank you!
> Hi Faisal,
> it doesn't look to me like this patch has gotten the necessary "looks
> good" that would make it ok to check it in - if you got that via a
> different channel (for example, from a code owner on IRC), please always
> make sure to mention that on the review thread.
> Especially for major changes like this, it is really important to have the
> code thoroughly reviewed before checking it in. Companies run continuously
> integrated build environments from clang's development head, so it's
> critical for us to have a high quality standard for check-ins, otherwise
> we're wasting people's time to hunt down the issues after they got checked
> in (which is usually much harder and more expensive than finding issues
> during review).
> In this case, we noticed that the change went in only because our tools
> noted a layering violation:
> Decl should not depend on Sema.
> After syncing with Chandler on IRC he OK'ed that I roll back this change
> (and the clean-up follow-up patch). I'll post on the relevant commit
> threads once that has happened.
> I'll try to come up with a proposal for the llvm dev policy to capture the
> usual rant that Chandler would put at the end of such messages.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-commits