[PATCH] D83088: Introduce CfgTraits abstraction

[Nicolai Hähnle via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

nhaehnle added a comment.

Hi Mehdi, this is not an appropriate place for this discussion. Yes, we have a general rule that patches can be reverted if they're obviously broken (e.g. build bot problems) or clearly violate some other standard. This is a good rule, but it doesn't apply here. If you think it does, please state your case in the email thread that I've started on llvm-dev for this very purpose. Just one thing:

> - the burden of convincing of the approach is on the patch author, reverting is forcing the discussion here.

I was trying to have this conversation. I am more than happy to have it, and I would be happy for me people to participate! But what can I do if the only(!) person who voices concerns just goes into radio silence, and the total number of people who participate is small in any case, despite raising it on llvm-dev as well?

It is in fact the decision to **not** revert the change which is apparently required to force the discussion!

P.S.: It's easy to miss on Phabricator, but there is already a long stack of patches which build on this. In a way this is a good thing because it can inform the discussion, but I will hold off from pushing more for now even though many of them have already been accepted.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D83088/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D83088