r209319 - Sema: Implement DR244

[Chandler Carruth]

On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Alp Toker <alp at nuanti.com> wrote:

> On 21/05/2014 23:19, David Majnemer wrote:
>
>> Author: majnemer
>> Date: Wed May 21 15:19:59 2014
>> New Revision: 209319
>>
>> URL: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=209319&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Sema: Implement DR244
>>
>> Summary:
>> Naming the destructor using a typedef-name for the class-name is
>> well-formed.
>>
>> This fixes PR19620.
>>
>> Reviewers: rsmith, doug.gregor
>>
>
> Did Doug participate in review for this patch?
>

No, Richard Smith did. I see a pretty complete review thread for the DR244
patch in my inbox. I've even checked and none of the emails were lost in
the recent email list snafu.


>
> Looking through SVN history, I'm seeing an alarming number of confusing
> review trails.
>

Can you point them out specifically? I too keep a pretty close eye on these
kinds of things and I'm not seeing any examples.


>
> If review happened off-list that's fine, but it needs to be stated clearly
> because the system works on trust.
>

I don't think off-list review is fine... It happens some times, for good or
bad reasons, and its not the end of the world. But it is definitely not
SOP, and I haven't seen any evidence of it becoming more pervasive. If you
see it, call it out. When patches merit pre-commit review, they should get
it from the whole community.


>
> (In fact, I'm seeing relatively inactive developer names showing up
> suspiciously in these "Reviewers" lines while some of the most active
> reviewers barely appear at all. Could this be a problem with Phabricator or
> some internal system you guys are using?)


I'm really not sure what you're worried about here. Again, specific
examples?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-commits/attachments/20140521/12d4ec05/attachment.html>